Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to Senator Minchin, the Minister representing the Prime Minister. Is the minister aware of an answer by the Treasurer in question time on 15 February where he acknowledged that Treasury had not modelled the impact of climate change on the Australian economy? Further, is the minister aware of evidence from the Australian Greenhouse Office at estimates a day later where officials said that no work on the impact of cuts to greenhouse gas emissions on the economy had been commissioned by the government in the last two years? Can the minister explain why the government has not undertaken any analysis of climate change on the Australian economy? Doesn’t the government’s failure to undertake such analysis expose it as having been asleep at the wheel on climate change for the last 11 years?

Nick Minchin (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance and Administration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I say, this argument that the Labor Party is trying to perpetrate, that we have done nothing for 11 years, of course does not wash. You can see in the budget papers that $2 billion worth of spending initiatives have been undertaken. We are on target. We are very close to achieving our Kyoto target of a 108 per cent rise in emissions. So there has been an enormous commitment by our government on this issue.

As to the issue of whether or not there has been modelling of the impacts of climate change, I am advised that, indeed, we have undertaken extensive analysis of the implications of climate change on Australia. The Department of the Environment and Water Resources has produced 14 publications on climate change impacts during the period 2002 to 2007. The most recent comprehensive report on impacts, Climate change risk and vulnerability: promoting an efficient adaptation response in Australia, was published in 2005. A 2006 report on science and impacts was called Stronger evidence but new challenges. Climate change science 2001-2005 was also published by what is now DEW—a new acronym. Numerous reports have been published by other Australian government agencies: the CSIRO, ABARE and the Bureau of Meteorology. More recent reports on specific issues are available, as well as specific guides such as 2006: climate change impacts and risk management: a guide for business and government, published by the same department.

So it is false to suggest that we are not seeking to ensure that we understand the possible impacts of climate change on Australia. We have been very actively engaged with international work in this area. We are the ones who set up the AP6 organisation to bring together the United States, China and India—who are responsible, among themselves, for some 56 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions—to work on technological responses to climate change. So we have a very proud record that is premised on the basis that we do what is practical, sensible and achievable, that does not cost jobs, that does not whip up the sort of hysteria which some in the Labor Party propose, and that does not suggest closing down the coal industry, like some on the left of Australian politics purport to put forward.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Isn’t the government’s failure to assess the impact of climate change on the economy further evidence that it is full of climate change sceptics, including the minister himself? Hasn’t the government’s failure to respond to the challenge of climate change seen Australia left behind and exposed to greater economic and environmental risk?

Nick Minchin (SA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance and Administration) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What we do know is that what I understand is still Labor Party policy of proposing a 50 per cent unilateral cut in Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions would do almost nothing for global greenhouse gas emissions. Senator Ian Campbell, a very good environment minister, kept making the point that you could shut down the Australian economy today and our emissions would be replaced by China alone within nine months. Get real. The Labor Party has no comprehension of what is involved in this issue and what the cost to the Australian economy could be in pursuing its 50 per cent cut, which would make no difference because China would replace it in nine months. We have been pursuing $2 billion worth of very practical, effective policies to reduce Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions without putting thousands of Australians out of jobs, as Labor’s policies would do.