Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Health Administration) Share this | Hansard source

I will just take a few minutes to advise the Senate that I will not be supporting the motion to extend hours. This is consistent with a conversation I had with my leader this morning, when I advised him that I will not be able to support his position to vote for Labor’s flawed ETS legislation in the Senate before Copenhagen and before an outcome has been reached at least in the US. I agree with the sentiments expressed around the chamber that a deal that essentially has been negotiated in secret over a six-week period cannot properly be scrutinised over a two-day period. We had a very lengthy debate in our party room yesterday, and much has been said about that in the media today. I think it would be indecent to force the Senate to make a decision on such a significant piece of legislation in the time that is practically available to us, and an extension of hours in an ad hoc fashion is not going to fix that.

I support the proposition that Australia should do everything we can to help reduce global greenhouse gas emissions. Whatever way you want to describe it, this legislation is not strong action on climate change. The reality is that, in the absence of an appropriately comprehensive global agreement, this scheme in Australia will push up the price of everything, it will cost jobs, it will put pressure on our economy, it will put our energy security at risk and it will be bad in particular for regional Australia—and all of that without helping to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions. To reduce emissions in Australia in a way that will increase emissions in other parts of the world is not effective action on climate change. That is why the coalition has for some time held the very sensible and absolutely sound public policy position that we should wait to see what happens in Copenhagen—not because Copenhagen is some sort of artificial deadline but because Copenhagen is supposed to be the international conference where countries from around the world come together and put on the table the sorts of targets they would be prepared to commit to.

The Treasury modelling of the economic impact of Labor’s ETS is based on a whole series of very heroic assumptions. I am not going to hold the Senate up for much longer. However, the key issue that troubles me is that an ETS in Australia can be an effective mechanism to help reduce global greenhouse gas emissions only if it is part of an appropriately comprehensive global scheme; but, with the distortions in terms of international trade competitiveness and in terms of exporting emissions as well as jobs without a global agreement, it will not be. Depending on what happens in other parts of the world, it may well be that I would be quite comfortable to support an ETS at some time in the future, but right now I am not. I do not think it would be appropriate to rush the Senate, whether it be over the next two days, the next four days or the next five days. This has to be properly scrutinised. I intend to support Senator Williams’s motion to defer this legislation. I also intend to support Senator Milne’s motion to refer the legislation to the Senate Economics Legislation Committee for further consideration. As I have mentioned to the Senate, I will be voting against an extension of time—and, just to make it absolutely clear, I did have a conversation this morning with my leader, Malcolm Turnbull, to advise him of that.

Question put:

That the motion (Senator Ludwig’s) be agreed to.