Ian Campbell (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment and Heritage) Share this | Hansard source

I would like to make a couple of points. Senator Brown asked an entirely reasonable question. I think the last 11 minutes that Senator Carr blustered and filibustered for did not raise a single question. He needs to answer the question: what will he do when he has an assessment that says the Sonoma coalmine in Queensland will produce X million tonnes when the coal is burnt somewhere? He needs to answer the question: what will happen when a future Labor minister is given an assessment that says that the Anvil Hill mine will create 10 million tonnes? He just blustered on and wasted 10 minutes. He did not answer that question. What he failed to address was the fact that many members of the Australian Labor Party, mostly in his own diminishing faction or mini faction, have gone on the record making it quite clear that they oppose coal. Mr Beazley was unable to do this in his time as leader, but it is time that the Leader of the Opposition made a clear statement in relation to coal.

A Labor Party member of the House of Representatives has written to me. Her letter, above her own signature, states quite clearly, and I quote:

The Hunter is one of the world’s carbon capitals and is home to a rapacious coal-mining industry. Anvil Hill is a key part of the Hunter Valley coal export expansion which needs to be stopped if the world is to avoid climate change.

I would say that Senator Milne and Kelly Hoare are of like mind on that statement. The Newcastle Council, the Waverly Council and Labor Party members have all said that we cannot have coal if we are to save the climate, when in fact sensible people know that coal, whether we like it or not, will form a substantial part of the baseload power provision for the planet over the next 25 or 30 years at the very least. There will be an expansion from about 4½ million tonnes of coal to 7½ million tonnes of coal—I might have that figure wrong; I might have about two noughts missing there. There will be an expansion of about 30 or 40 per cent in the extraction and use of coal for baseload power across the planet in that time. So the real challenge, if you are serious about addressing climate change, is in fact to realise that.

This government is putting hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars into renewables. Labor are not promising any money; they are just mouthing platitudes as usual. This is a big challenge for Kevin Rudd and his team. Rather than just saying, ‘Oh, we like renewables and we like clean coal,’ they should put up a budget for clean coal. Let us put a price on it and make a choice. He should say to the Australian people: ‘We’ll spend this much on education. We’ll spend this much on clean coal.’ Do not just say, ‘Oh, we like clean coal,’ or ‘We like renewables,’ put a budget on it. We have put up over $2 billion. We are spending that money. We are rolling out programs. We can be judged on our performance. I will be very happy to be judged on our performance of delivering practical programs to abate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases such as methane.

There is one other point I need to respond to from Senator Carr. Senator Hill did put out a discussion paper as promised in relation to the desirability of a greenhouse trigger. I think it needs to be put on the Senate record that every single state Labor government responded to that discussion paper, as did the two territory governments. Every single state Labor government opposed the greenhouse trigger. Senator Carr, being an active member of a faction in Victoria—as I said, a diminishing faction—talked about my factional allegiances and my role as Manager of Government Business. We know that Senator Carr’s record will show that he was the shortest-serving Manager of Opposition Business, probably for good reason.