Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, welcome back to 2016.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Wong.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Brandis. I refer to Mr Turnbull's statement on action to address climate change, and I quote:

My view is the market-based mechanism, the emissions trading scheme, is the most cost-effective.

Is Mr Turnbull's position the position of the Turnbull government?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Wong, happy new year to you. It is an important issue that you raise, Senator Wong, and of course the position of Mr Turnbull and of all ministers in the Turnbull government is the position of the government. There has been, Senator Wong, as you know, over a period of years very vigorous debate in this country about climate change policy. You know very well because you have been one of the most important participants in that debate in opposition and in government.

It is no secret that both the Australian Labor Party and the government have varied their views over the years, and that is the case in relation to Mr Turnbull. The position Mr Turnbull took in 2009 is not the position that the government takes now. That is unremarkable, but I can assure you, Senator Wong, that where Australia has landed on the question of climate policy is precisely where we ought to be. We have embraced and we took to the climate change conference in Paris the most ambitious per capita emissions reduction targets of any nation in the OECD. We were able to do that because the vigorous discussion we had within the coalition over the years has produced a set of policies that are effective. They are not ideological, but they are effective, and we are proud of them.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. I refer to Mr Turnbull's statement on a republic:

We don't have a hope of having a fair process to become a republic until we have a republican Prime Minister.

Is Mr Turnbull's position the position of the Turnbull government?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As in response to your primary question, Senator Wong, of course Mr Turnbull's views are the views of the government. Senator Wong, as you well know, public opinions about the question of whether, by what process and when Australia might become a republic have changed over the years. Mr Turnbull said after the failure of the 1999 referendum that he did not expect that Australia would become a republic in the lifetime of Her Majesty the Queen. That is a view he has expressed more recently again. There are a variety of views on both sides of politics about these issues, but the position that Mr Turnbull has stated—having, by the way, been closer to this issue over the years than virtually any member of this parliament—is of course the position of the government.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. I refer to the minister's answer in which he said, I believe, 'Of course, Mr Turnbull's views are the views of the government,' and I refer to Mr Turnbull's statement on marriage equality:

I certainly think we should have a free vote and I've been very public about that.

Is Mr Turnbull's position the position of the Turnbull government? Can the minister explain why Mr Turnbull says one thing while his government does another?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Wong, you have identified in the questions you have put to me three issues—climate change policy, whether Australia should be a republic and marriage equality—over which public discussion has developed and changed over years. In all three cases the nature of the issue has changed over the course of years. Senator Wong, everybody in this chamber and everybody who may be listening to this broadcast knows that. For example, there are people who today believe in a republic who used to be opponents of a republic; there are people who today have a view of climate change policy which is different from the view they may have had some years ago, and the same in relation to same-sex marriage. The fact is that over the course of years many people's views have changed on the way these issues ought to be dealt with.