Linda Kirk (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to take note today of answers given in question time also in relation to climate change. The absolute, bare truth of this matter in the climate change debate is simply that the Howard government has had 11 years to take resolute action on climate change and has done no such thing. What has it done? It has denied, it has run sceptical lines and then it has tried, as a last resort, spin.

The fact is that it has spent millions, not billions, of dollars on climate change. In fact, it has spent less than 0.05 per cent of the annual federal budget on climate change expenditure. Here is an inconvenient truth: during this term of the parliament alone, the Howard government will spend about the same amount on advertising—that is, about $850 million—as it has spent on climate change since 1996; that is, $867 million. So, in the course of the last 11 years, it has spent $867 million on climate change; yet, just in the term of this parliament alone, it has spent almost exactly the same amount of money on government advertising.

As I said before, the government spent less than 0.05 per cent of the annual federal budget on climate change. This amounts to about $5 a year for every man, woman and child in Australia. It is an absolutely miniscule amount. As we have heard today, the government’s problems on climate change are systemic. The government cannot bring itself to accept that we should ratify the Kyoto protocol and that we as a nation should be sitting at the table and influencing the negotiations surrounding this matter. This government cannot bring itself to accept that a target is a perfectly reasonable public policy position to have. As we heard Senator Evans mention, a number of government members cannot even bring themselves to accept the fact that we, as human beings, have created the greenhouse gas emissions that are contributing to global warming. We know that there are a number of climate change sceptics within the government. In the time I have available I do not have time to mention them all. The government simply will not recognise that global warming will have significant impacts on our economy, our environment and our society. It is time that the government took some responsibility for this—here in Australia, right now, in 2007. That is the bottom line in this debate.

By contrast, Labor have indicated that we are ready, willing and able to tackle this dangerous problem of climate change. There are many things that a Labor government would do. For example, we would restore Australia’s international leadership on climate change, we would immediately ratify Kyoto and we would provide $150 million within our aid budget to assist our Pacific neighbours to adapt to climate change. A Labor government would develop a carbon market and reform our institutions. We, in contrast to this government, would lead by example. We would drive a clean energy renewable revolution. Labor would increase the mandatory renewable energy target that is now languishing under this government. We have seen that the renewable industry has had to go overseas in order to make a go of it. Labor, in contrast to this government, would be—as our shadow minister, Peter Garrett, has said on a number of occasions—fair dinkum about climate change. We would meet the climate change challenge, something that this government—a tired, 11-year-old Howard government—has no possibility whatsoever of doing.