Climate Change
Senator the Hon. Penny Wong
Minister for Climate Change and Water
Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme 3rd reading speech to the Senate
Transcript
02 December 2009
E&OE Proof only PW 350/09
Penny Wong responds to some of the arguments in Climate Change debate.
WONG: In summing up, I first thank all senators for their contributions to the debate. In relation to the comments we have just heard, the best way of characterising most of the contribution from Senator Abetz is ‘the shallowest response to the deepest of the nation’s problems’. In many ways his contribution could have been summed up with one sentence: ‘We do not support action on climate change.’ In many ways the Australian people might have given him more credit for honesty then.
I want to respond to just some of the arguments in this debate before the debate is closed—first, the comments of Senator Joyce, which were many, varied and quite loud. The first is that this is not about the science; this is about the economy. He is partly right. It is about both, because you do not tackle climate change unless you change your economy. It is very simple: you do not tackle climate change unless you change your economy. You have to make polluters pay, and if you do not make polluters pay then you will not tackle climate change, because you will not change the very behaviour that has caused and continues to contribute to and cause this problem in the first place. So, when Senator Abetz says, ‘We will have a policy on climate change but it will be easy,’ he is not to be believed, because there is no easy solution to this problem. If there were, it would have been dealt with by now.
The reality is the former Prime Minister, John Howard, was honest about this. He said you could not take this forward, you could not make these economic changes, without some impact on prices. The Liberal Party have made clear their intentions. They will try and pretend they are taking action on climate change without going to the cause of the problem, but there is no escaping the cause of the problem. You have to put a price on pollution that is the only way you can respond to climate change.
The second point I want to make is about the scare campaign which has been in practice already in this chamber in recent days. It is always disappointing when politicians, instead of debating the issues and the facts, resort to putting forward things which are untrue—and which often they know to be untrue—in order to block action. Senator Joyce has come into this place and said that that lamb roasts will cost over $100. He knows that the Treasury has said that in the first year of this scheme the estimated increase per kilo for a leg of lamb is 4c. Why does he believe it is responsible for an elected representative to come into this place and put forward something that is so obviously incorrect? There is only one explanation—that is, when you cannot fight the argument, you run a scare campaign. He has accused us of making pensioners poor. He has accused us of not supporting working families. This is from the party that delivered Work Choices—the irony of that is clear for all to see.
I will remind the chamber that this government is ensuring through this plan, endorsed just one week ago by the Liberal Party room, that the largest single share of assistance under this legislation goes to Australian households. For example, we estimate a single pensioner’s costs will rise by about $286 a year. We are providing them with $455 a year worth of assistance, which is more than the anticipated costs, because when we say we want polluters to pay because that is the only way we can act on climate change we also say we want to support Australian households, particularly low-income Australians, through that transition. To Senator Joyce I say this: do not come in here and peddle things which are not true in an attempt to oppose climate change. Why do you not just come in here and say, ‘This is all bunkum, we don’t believe in climate change, we don’t believe it’s real’? That at least would be more truthful.
Then there is the argument that we should not act because it does not matter what we do. Australians as a nation have always done our bit and we have never said we should simply sit in the grandstand and watch others do the work. This is about doing our bit as part of a global agreement. This is about doing our bit as part of responding to what is a global challenge. The government has never pretended that this nation on its own can tackle this problem. What we have said to the Australian people is that we too in this nation have to act.
Then there is the argument about who understands what. I say to the opposition: Australians understand one thing. They understand that you do not want to act on climate change. The fact is the arguments put by the opposition do not stack up. They are sham arguments from people driven and now led by people who do not believe that climate change is real. What has been demonstrated in this session of the parliament is that they will do and say anything to avoid taking action. They will do anything to block action on climate change. These are people sprinting back to the past.
Another furphy in this debate has been that we are going first. I again remind the chamber of the falseness of that argument. Countries that have either legislated for trading schemes or committed to them include the European Union—which does include nations like the United Kingdom, France and Germany—New Zealand, Japan and the United States. These are some of the actions which have already been legislated for or committed to and I have in this chamber many times pointed out what else is happening. There is no danger of this country rushing ahead but, as a result of the actions of the opposition, there is a risk that this country will be left behind. That is the greater risk, that we are left behind. Action on climate change has been supported and called for by no less than the Queen, John Howard, conservative Prime Minister, John Key, from New Zealand and David Cameron in the United Kingdom. This Liberal Party makes John Howard look green. They are not only out of touch with most of Australia, they are out of touch with most conservative parties around the world—a fact that Mr Turnbull has reminded them of on many occasions.
I will briefly mention the Greens and I will just say this. This legislation may well fail on the Greens vote and whatever rhetoric those Greens senators engage in, they will have voted for Australia’s carbon pollution to continue to rise. They will have voted against action on climate change.
There are so many retorts that I would like to make, Mr President, but I will not indulge myself. This is a big reform. We knew that when we took it to the Australian people at the last election and we also knew that when we sat down to negotiate with the opposition. This is a long-term, lasting structural reform to the Australian economy. It is about making a change now over the decades to come because that is the only way in which we can respond to climate change. These sorts of reforms historically in this nation have only succeeded when there has been leadership across this parliament and it is regrettable and to the great detriment of this nation and to the great shame of the Liberal Party that they have fallen, as a party, so short.
I do have some acknowledgements that I wish to make. I first want to thank Labor members and senators who have campaigned for and supported this great Labor reform for the future of the nation. They have done and will continue to do what is hard, not because it is easy but because it is right. They will continue to look to the future and that is the way this party and this government will continue to go forward. I want to particularly thank and acknowledge the Department of Climate Change and all public servants across government who have served this government and previous governments with professionalism and have demonstrated their enormous capacity for hard work over two years in working up this reform. I thank them and I think the Australian people thank them for the work they have done to contribute so much to this important and big reform.
I also want to thank those members of the Liberal Party who, whatever the differences I have with some of their public policy positions, have shown a willingness to look to the national interest. We saw some of that on display here today and I thank them for that. It is regrettable that too many of their colleagues have chosen instead to go the other way and not look to the national interest. Most of all, I want to acknowledge the many Australians who have continued to support action on climate change and have continued to call for it; the many who have emailed, written or phoned not only my office but also the offices of others in this government to express their support. I particularly want to thank young Australians because this is an issue that so many young Australians care so deeply about. I have often said that the discussion that is had and the questions that are asked when I have spoken to groups of young Australians at times would leave the Senate looking somewhat inadequate.
This is a debate about the future, and Australians know this. In the heat and fury of today’s fight it is often easy to lose perspective, and too many opposite have lost that perspective. The question is: how will this look tomorrow; how will this look in a few years; how will this look 10 or 20 years from now? Long after most of us have left this place, we will continue to be held accountable. We should leave this place being able to look Australians in the eye and say: ‘We acted. We took responsibility.’ Instead, some of those opposite will simply have to look Australians in the eye and say: ‘I voted this way. I voted for the future not now and in fact not ever.’ This government and this party will hold true to the aspirations of the Australian people. We will do all we can and continue to do all we can to safeguard our children’s future and we will not take a backwards step. I commend the bills to the chamber.