Senate debates

Friday, 10 November 2023

Bills

Environment Protection (Sea Dumping) Amendment (Using New Technologies to Fight Climate Change) Bill 2023; In Committee

11:40 am

Photo of Glenn SterleGlenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Seriously, what a pathetic stunt this is! Here we have the opposition siding with the Greens to vote against a bill that they agreed with. For the benefit of those sitting in the gallery, or listening online or on the radio, this is a bill that they've said publicly they support—the Liberal-Nationals. That mob. The opposition has said that this bill is important to underwriting investment certainty for carbon capture and storage projects.

And it is, particularly in my home state of WA. And yet, despite their public support for this piece of important legislation, they have chosen to play kiddie politics. I have to ask: what does the opposition believe? Do they support regulatory certainty or don't they? Do they support a bill that has been endorsed by both the House and a Senate committee? What is clear—and bizarre, quite frankly—is that they now don't support a bill which they had themselves acknowledged as important in underwriting investment certainty for carbon capture and storage projects.

There is a range of emerging carbon capture and storage projects around the country that cannot proceed without this legislation. Carbon capture and storage is, potentially, an important stepping stone in maintaining energy security while also reducing the carbon footprint of our energy sources. It's estimated that if the current, or currently planned, WA projects go ahead they will have the capacity to store more than eight million tonnes of CO2 annually. That would represent over 11 per cent of WA's annual current emissions. If those opposite are serious about achieving both of these important goals then they need to stop with the kiddie political games and stunts and provide the regulatory—and, therefore, investment—certainty that the energy sector needs. If they care about jobs in the WA resources sector—and I know that those in the corner there don't—then they will get out of the way. The opposition is holding these up from progressing. We, the grown-ups in the Labor Party, on this side, believe in providing regulatory certainty for industry and community. Those opposite, with that mob in the corner, choose to oppose it. The actions of those opposite are putting Australian projects at risk, and this means they're putting Australian jobs at risk.

The minister has outlined a range of projects that will be formally regulated under this legislation, and I'll tell you about some of the projects in your state, Senator Cox, of Western Australia. I just wanted to mention that so that every Western Australia knows that you're the one holding this up! And there are projects in Victoria and the Northern Territory. The WA projects are being driven by industry, with support from government. There has been extensive industry and community consultation. It seems that the main obstacle in providing the certainty industry needs to progress this is coming from the Liberals and the Nationals. I wish them luck in explaining their latest political stunt to the people of Western Australia! These are projects which are backed by some of our closest trading partners, who want to invest in Australian carbon capture and storage projects.

The coalition—the Liberals and the Nationals—talk about supporting investment and jobs. But, presented with an opportunity to do just that, they fail the test. The bill gives effect to Australia's international obligations arising out of the 2009 and 2013 amendments to the London protocol.

Specifically, the bill gives effect to our international commitments in relation to the safe and effective regulation of the export of carbon dioxide streams from carbon dioxide capture processes for the purposes of sequestration into a sub-seabed geological formation. The bill is important to provide regulatory certainty for carbon capture and storage projects that rely on transboundary movement of carbon. There are at least five projects the government is aware of that cannot progress without this legislation, as I've said. I've said that these projects are in Western Australia, where I proudly come from, Victoria and the Northern Territory. As I said earlier, the bill would enable these projects to be safely and properly regulated, which is important to protect the marine environment.

CCS technology is a mature technology. There hasn't been a particular need or drive to do large CO2 storage until recent times, when we've had to think about carbon abatement. The UN IPCC, the Climate Change Authority, the CSIRO and the International Energy Agency all recognise the need for CCS as a key tool to drive decarbonisation outcomes across the resources sector. Unlike those opposite—forget about them in the corner!—I commend the bill to the Senate, and I encourage the opposition to stop playing politics and get behind it too.

Comments

No comments