Mark Furner (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise this afternoon to contribute to this matter of public importance, because it is a matter of public importance. I am sure it is a matter that the public wish to have some sensible debate on and hear some informa­tion on. This is not a case of mounting a scare campaign and frightening people about what will affect them and what industries will be affected; we have a developing plan around this issue, and the Gillard Labor government is working hard to design a carbon price which will tackle climate change and enhance opportunities and prosperity now and into the future.

Unfortunately, there is no-one in the chamber opposite that was involved in the two inquiries I and other senators from the government were involved in. I am referring to the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme and climate change inquiries, where we heard firsthand the opportunities in renewable energy—opportunities for industries to foster and grow and for jobs promotion in this area. For some reason, those opposite did not think the contributions and evidence from those inquiries was relevant. Well, it is easy to stick your heads in the sand being climate change sceptics, or whatever you refer to yourself as; I refer to you as the coalition of climate critics, because I have not heard anything from you that contributes to dealing with climate change.

I guess it is easy for me, being a Queensland senator, to understand the importance of this issue. In the likes of Cairns, starting from around Mackay and going up to the Great Barrier Reef, thous­ands and thousands of jobs will be lost in the tourism industry if we do not act on climate change. I know those opposite claim to be the champions of industry, employers and jobs. Why aren't they prepared to put their hands on their hearts and start protecting those people in vulnerable industries and areas of Queensland where this will greatly impact on jobs? It is not just jobs—you need to look at the residential properties along the coastline, and not just in Queensland; other coastlines will be affected if we do not act on climate change. I am pretty certain that those opposite know that.

We do need to take some action on climate change to ensure that future generations are able to enjoy this beautiful country that we share. It is an environment we treasure and it is an environment that we need to make sure we look after. That is why it is our responsibility as a government to make sure we act on this particular issue. We need to be in a position today where we can deliver on an environment that is healthy and economic resilience for Australians for tomorrow. We have a strong economy. We know we can deal with this issue. We know we can work hand in hand on what needs to be done to assist this particular area. We have a track record on that in the way we handled the global financial crisis. We made sure that our industries and jobs in this country were protected and shielded from the global financial crisis. I remind people opposite, over there in the opposition, that they voted against that package, the $43 billion package that saved jobs and protected the economy—yet you voted against it. I could not believe that. Those in the public gallery should always remember that the opposition opposed good economic measures, measures that protected our economy. We never had an impact from the global financial crisis in this country, but those opposite opposed the package hook, line and sinker.

The other point we need to be reminded about is that Australia is the highest polluting country per capita in the developed world. The science is out there on these points. We need to put on record what this means. Climate scientists around the world are telling us that carbon pollution is causing climate change. There is no point in denying that. The government accepts the climate science on this. Globally, 2010 was the warmest year on record. It tied with 2005 and 1998, with 2001 to 2010 being the warmest decade. You would know that, Senator Williams, coming from the land. You would realise the changes that are happening as this affects our climate and our country. In fact, 2010 is the 24th consecutive year with global temperatures above the 20th century average. In Australia, 2001 to 2010 was the warmest decade on record and each decade since the 1940s has been warmer than the preceding decade.

Australia faces huge economic costs from climate change across a range of sectors, including energy supply, water security, agriculture, health, coastal communities and infrastructure. The climate scientists are also telling us that with temperatures rising we would expect to see more extreme weather events, including more frequent and intense droughts, floods and bushfires. Unfortuna­tely, we saw a lot of devastation in Queensland this year. No doubt there was a contribution from climate change to severe floods and the horrific Cyclone Yasi that devastated some of the communities in North Queensland. That is another reason we need to act on this issue.

We cannot be left behind. We need to be part of this global economy as it moves to clean energy. Many countries are already acting to reduce greenhouse emissions by setting renewable targets and introducing emissions trading schemes. Fourteen of Australia's trading partners have renewable energy targets. Even President Obama has recently proposed that the US have 80 per cent of its electricity coming from clean energy by 2035. Emissions trading schemes already operate in 31 European countries, including the United Kingdom, Denmark, Finland, Norway, Sweden and the Netherlands. Emissions trading schemes are under discussion elsewhere, including in Canada, the EU, Japan and South Africa. So do not believe those comments that you hear either from the press or, some cases, from those opposite indicating that we are acting alone. We are not acting alone; we are part of an outcome and solution acting in concert with other countries around the globe.

Our policy means that 1,000 of the top polluters will be responsible for paying for the pollution they emit. They are the ones who are polluting. We will be pricing per carbon tonne for them to clean up their act. How it works is that it provides generous household assistance to help with family budgets. It will protect jobs as businesses make the transition to a clean energy economy. It will tackle climate change, including investing in new, clean technology. That is, in principle, how the government's carbon price framework will operate in relation to our scheme.

Conversely, if you look at how the opposition will operate, their direct action will cost families and the budget. It will cost the average family $720 a year and it will cost the budget over $30 billion. What an irresponsible position to take in dealing with one of the most significant issues that we have to handle at this particular time. Figures show that the coalition's direct action policy would cost over $30 billion rather than the claimed $10.5 billion. The rising costs of direct action mean that a future coalition government would face a $30 billion budget black hole. Direct action is ineffective. It is a scheme that is so environmentally ineffective that it will deliver only 25 per cent of the carbon pollution abatement required for the coalition to meet the bipartisan target of minus five per cent. What an irresponsible position to take in handling this major issue.

Today the Leader of the Opposition fails to deliver on good policies and plans for the nation. We believe in climate change and the science is there to show its effect on our planet. There are some reasonable quotes from those who are knowledgeable about Mr Tony Abbott's position on climate change, which is that it is 'crap'. There was a comment recently that that was a comment on the quality of our economists rather than on the merits of their argument. I think that is a typical example of how irresponsible the opposition is when it comes to this matter.

Debate interrupted.