Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party) Share this | Hansard source

As I indicated in the second reading debate, the coalition will support this bill, although I have been a little perplexed by the government's rapid backflip on these issues. As I said earlier, it's great to see the Labor Party come back to planet Earth after a journey through the green universe chasing hydrogen, batteries and all sorts of other madcap schemes that we're throwing billions of taxpayer dollars at to no effect, so it's great to see them come back and say, 'We want to invest in liquid fuels, and we'd like to try and secure our nation's energy needs,' on the eve of the worst energy crisis, perhaps, since the 1970s. The question I have, though, is about how committed this government is to that because, while these changes to support fossil fuels are welcome in this bill, it still retains a panoply of prohibitions and restrictions across various acts to support fossil fuels that the government itself has introduced in the past few years. It can't sit there and say, somehow, it's not the author of the problems we're about to face when it did the very thing over the past few years that it's now trying to unwind. It, in the last few years, did introduce a variety of restrictions and prohibitions on fossil fuels. In fact, it's demonised the industry. It really has demonised coal, oil and gas. People who work in that industry feel belittled, often, by the Labor Party's constant talking down. They talk about coal-fired power stations as if they're old and ageing, even though the hardworking men and women in those stations are what keeps the lights on tonight in this building and keeps our electric cars charged. I know the minister across the table doesn't share all these views, but unfortunately he's been tied to a government that does, and it's implemented that through changes in our laws.

The first question I have of the government is: despite this conversion—despite this Damascus-style awakening from this government on fossil fuels—does the government still support the Belem declaration on the transition away from fossil fuels? Just four months ago, in late November last year, the energy minister, Minister Bowen, who is now spruiking the benefits and needs to import liquid fossil fuels, was over there. I think he visited Belem. I don't know. Is that where he was? It was at COP30. Yes, Belem. I think that was the one where they carved out half the Amazonian forest to carve out a road to the climate change conference. He was over there in Belem, and he signed this agreement, which was for a 'just, orderly and equitable' transition away from fuels. That was just four months ago, and here we are passing special legislation to bring them in by the billions. Just four months ago, the government said, 'No, we don't need them; we want to walk away from them.'

This agreement went on to say that these governments, including Australia's, supported the call to advance a road map for the transition away from fossil fuels. Australia signed the agreement, along with other countries including Austria, Belgium Cambodia, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Denmark, Fiji, Finland, Ireland, Jamaica, Kenya, Luxembourg, the Marshall Islands, Mexico, Micronesia, Nepal, the Netherlands, Panama, Spain, Slovenia, Vanuatu and Tuvalu. I don't see any of our major trading partners on that list. There are 24 countries, making up less than 10 per cent of world GDP. They include none of the Middle East countries that we're so reliant on for our liquid fuels and our fertiliser. Indeed, yes, I'm right. I remember doing this work at the time. None of these 24 signatories were among our top 15 trading partners. Why would the government sign such a ridiculous agreement to say we don't need these things just four months ago and now have to scramble around like headless chooks in this Senate trying to fix up the mess they have created by demonising this industry for the last four years?

They've run a war on fossil fuels, and that's put us in a much more vulnerable position than we need be in. We have enormous resources in this country. We should be developing them and using them. When I was resources minister in the former government, we were trying to do that. We were trying to get the Great Australian Bight, the Browse Basin and the Beetaloo Basin going. We got vilified by the Labor Party for supporting investment in the Beetaloo Basin, which is turning out to be quite prospective, may I say.

So my question to the minister is: does the government continue to support the Belem declaration on a just transition away from fossil fuels?