Senate debates

Tuesday, 11 August 2009

Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Bill 2009; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2009; Australian Climate Change Regulatory Authority Bill 2009; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (Charges-Customs) Bill 2009; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (Charges-Excise) Bill 2009; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (Charges-General) Bill 2009; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS Fuel Credits) Bill 2009; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS Fuel Credits) (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2009; Excise Tariff Amendment (Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme) Bill 2009; Customs Tariff Amendment (Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme) Bill 2009; Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Amendment (Household Assistance) Bill 2009

Second Reading

12:49 pm

Photo of David FeeneyDavid Feeney (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

good on you, Wacka!—if we get a commitment from other countries to do the same. It may be that in the period after Copenhagen a consensus will emerge that higher targets are needed if climate change is to be arrested. When and if that happens this government will of course deal with that in a responsible way, but at present the government’s view is that the targets in this bill are the most realistic and the most attainable, and I think the evidence clearly supports that view. I also think that the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme in this bill is the best model of the various models on offer for attaining these important targets.

As Senator Xenophon knows, I was happy to listen to a presentation of his alternative scheme—but I was not persuaded. If we were to drop the CPRS now and embark on a totally new scheme, it would entail many months, maybe years, of further delay and it would also put us out of sync with other countries that are adopting emissions trading schemes similar to the one found in this bill. What those opposite need to remember as they look at Malcolm Turnbull’s fig leaf of an input—not a policy but an input—is that it would mean that Australia would embark on a model no other nation has embarked upon and we would design a scheme incompatible with any being developed across the world. That in itself makes it a nonsense.

Ultimately, it does not matter what the Greens do; they have chosen to be spectators rather than participants in this process. It ultimately does not matter what Senator Fielding and Senator Xenophon do. The fate of this bill depends on the coalition senators. Their negative and obstructionist attitude, which their weak and indecisive leader has been unable to reverse, will seriously impede this country’s ability to play an important role at Copenhagen and to play its proper role in action on climate change. Australia did nothing about climate change while those opposite were in government, and now they are trying to ensure from opposition that Australia continues to do nothing. Every opinion poll tells us that the Australian people want this government and this parliament to take strong action against climate change. Those opposite are very keen to demand more and more modelling of every possible consequence, every possible change and every possible permutation of the CPRS.

Comments

No comments