Senate debates
Wednesday, 1 April 2026
Matters of Urgency
Climate Change
4:36 pm
Charlotte Walker (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source
I rise today to discuss Senator McKim's urgency motion. You don't need to look far to see what people are dealing with right now. It's there in everyday conversations, at the shops, at home and in every community we represent. You don't need a briefing pack to realise that people are feeling the pressure right now. You see it when your rent goes up and when your insurance renewal comes through and you have to double-check that it's not a typo. It's when groceries somehow cost more but your bag feels lighter. Insurance is a big part of that story, because what we're seeing isn't random. It's the reality of more frequent and more extreme weather events—floods, fires, storms. That risk is going up, and insurance prices are going up with it. This isn't theoretical; it's what people are living through.
But I think where we need to be a bit careful is pretending that there is a single, simple fix that solves all of this overnight. There isn't. What the government is doing, and what I think really matters here, is focusing on the practical things that bring costs down and make communities safer, because the cheapest insurance claim is the one that never has to be made. That's why we've already committed $1 billion over five years to the Disaster Ready Fund, actually investing in resilience, in mitigation and in making sure communities aren't left exposed in the first place. That's why we've set up the Hazards Insurance Partnership—which sounds a bit technical, but what it's about is government and insurers finally sharing data properly so we know where risk is and where investment will make the biggest difference. It's why we're looking at things like standardising definitions in insurance contracts, because people shouldn't need a law degree to work out what they're covered for. These things might not be flashy, but they're what actually shifts prices over time.
At the same time, we're not ignoring the broader cost-of-living pressures that people are dealing with right now, because this isn't happening in isolation. We've delivered tax cuts for every taxpayer, with another one coming this year. We've backed real wage increases, especially for people on minimum and award wages, because your pay should reflect the value of your work. We've expanded paid parental leave. We're investing more into Medicare. We're cutting the cost of medicines down to $25 or less, which is huge for people managing ongoing health costs. We've got 30 per cent off home batteries to bring power bills down permanently. We're helping first home buyers get into the market with lower deposits. We're even freezing the excise on beer, which I know is getting a workout in some parts of the country. We've also cut student debt by 20 per cent. That is not nothing. All of this matters because, when we talk about cost of living, we're not talking about one bill; we're talking about the pile of them sitting on the kitchen counter.
On the climate side of this—because this is a part of the conversation—I don't think anyone seriously disputes that climate change is making these things worse. We had almost a decade of inaction on that, thanks to the coalition. That had real consequences, and we don't have the luxury of another decade of chopped legislation. Yes, there is a broader transition happening. Yes, there are questions about who pays and how we manage that fairly, but we need to get that balance right, because, if the goal is to lower costs for households, we have to be focused on policies that actually do that, not just ones that sound good in headlines but don't translate into lower premiums or safer homes.
I think Australians are pretty practical about this. They want action on climate. They also want to be able to afford their insurance, their groceries, their rent—all of it. The job of government is to bring those things together in a way that works in a real way in the real world, not pick one and ignore the rest. While I understand the intent behind this motion—and I think the concern is valid—the real test is: what actually delivers for people? What actually makes their lives more affordable, more secure and a little bit less stressful? That's what we're focused on, and that's what people expect of us.
No comments