All changes made to the description and title of this division.

View division | Edit description

Change Division
senate vote 2021-08-10#4

Edited by mackay staff

on 2021-09-10 16:49:40

Title

  • Motions Climate Change
  • Motions - Climate Change - Speed things along

Description

  • <p class="speaker">Larissa Waters</p>
  • <p>I seek leave to move a motion relating to 2030 targets in light of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.</p>
  • <p>Leave not granted.</p>
  • The majority voted in favour of a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2021-08-10.15.5) to put the question. That is, they voted to stop discussing the matter and instead vote on it immediately.
  • <p>Pursuant to contingent notice standing in my name, I move:</p>
  • <p class="italic">That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent Senator Waters moving a motion to provide for the consideration of a matter, namely a motion to provide that a motion relating to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change may be moved immediately and take precedence over all other business until determined.</p>
  • <p>We had a report last night that could not have been clearer in its warning. It is not the first time that we have had a clear warning and report from the world's scientists, but this one is the most urgent and the most pressing yet. I find it a little baffling that we have consternation in the chamber about the fact that 2030 is what we need to be talking about. You have a government whose targets for 2030 are so weak they are essentially one-third of what needs to occur to keep this country safe and to keep us underneath a 1&#189;-degree tipping point, beyond which there is no return. Certainly this government's policies have on us on track for four degrees of warming. That's actually catastrophe. That is actually the end of agriculture as we know it. It's dead oceans. It's bushfires of such severity that we cannot even fathom it. It is not an option.</p>
  • <p>So, yes, we need to change the government. Of course we need to change the government. This government is controlled by its climate denialist backbenchers. They can't even bring themselves to meet with the scientists, let alone follow their advice.</p>
  • <p>Honourable senators interjecting&#8212;</p>
  • <p>I'm being reminded by my erudite colleagues here that it's not just the backbench that have a problem with science in the government; of course, it's many of their frontbenchers as well. So it is absolutely clear that the government of this nation, the Morrison government, are not doing what is necessary to keep Australians safe. They are, in fact, setting us on a trajectory of a death sentence for nature, for society and for our economy. Wrong way; go back.</p>
  • <p>What we cannot tolerate is discussion of 2050 without discussion of what needs to happen in the next 10 years. The report last night could not have been clearer: 2050 is too late. Net zero by 2050 is too late. We can do so much better. We can actually create a jobs boom. We can transition those existing fossil fuel workers into clean jobs that will last and that won't cause them health problems. We can actually tackle this crisis collectively as a nation and give our nation and the world the best shot at a safe future. But we need to be doing that rapidly and urgently by cutting emissions from the coal, oil and gas sector, not by opening up new coal, oil and gas fields and not by dishing out public money to help private companies do that&#8212;certainly not when those private companies are donors to either the Liberal Party or, in many cases, the Labor Party. It is about time we stopped those fossil fuel donors from exerting so much influence over policymaking. We welcome the fact that parliament has spent a short part of today&#8212;we would hope for the whole day&#8212;talking about this issue, but what we cannot stomach is the idea that 2050 is somehow enough.</p>
  • <p>We want to work with the opposition. We want them to be in government, but without the Greens in the balance of power you won't see the strong and urgent action that the scientists are saying is necessary. We had world-leading climate laws. That's what the Greens and Labor delivered under the Gillard prime ministership. It was working. It is the only time emissions have come down in our nation's history. It was world leading and it was axed by this climate-denying government. We want to work with the opposition when they are in government, and we want them to go harder and faster on the climate crisis, because we don't have any time to lose. Warming of 1&#189; degrees is a tipping point that we cannot go above. We know that if we even hit two degrees our global coral reefs will be written off.</p>
  • <p>I take umbrage at the quite extensive 'contributions', as I might term them, from the opposition to our suspension motion. We know 2050 is too late. Delay is the new denial. We need this parliament to be talking about 2030 targets. The government's 2030 targets are so weak that they have us on a path which is a death sentence. I'm sick of fossil fuel companies calling the shots on our nation's climate policies. So is the rest of the country. For God's sake, give the money back and start listening to the scientists when drafting climate policy, or you will be consigned to the opposition benches, as I hope you will be, and the Greens will work with the new government to deliver decent climate action.</p>
  • <p class="speaker">Murray Watt</p>
  • <p>I want to briefly contribute to this debate to flag that Labor will be supporting the motion to suspend standing orders. We will not, however, be voting for the substantive motion, because it doesn't reflect the Labor position.</p>
  • <p>I do want to take the opportunity to also bring to the chamber's attention the very serious risks that have been outlined in the IPCC report released overnight, particularly for regional Queensland and especially for northern Australia. It is somewhat ironic that in this chamber some of the hardest opponents of taking action on climate change are representatives, so called, of regional Australia. The IPCC report makes very clear that it is regional Australia, more than any other part of the country and almost more than any other part of the world, that faces the most serious risks if action on climate change is not taken. Even in the last couple of years, whether it be the Black Summer fires, whether it be floods or whether it be cyclones, we have seen that, constantly, it's regional Australia that bears the brunt of our changing climate. It's regional Australia that pays the price for this government's lack of action on climate change, and it's regional Australia that is being so profoundly let down by a government that claims to represent it.</p>
  • <p>That's before we get to the incredible job opportunities that can exist in regional Australia if we actually start taking action on climate change. We can create jobs in regional Queensland and elsewhere in regional Australia if we take action on climate change. That's probably why every stakeholder, from the National Farmers Federation to Rio Tinto, BHP and gas companies, is backing net zero emissions by 2050. It's not because they're good corporate citizens; it's because they know that there is money to be made and jobs to be created. That's why they're backing it, that's why Labor is backing it, and that's why we need this government to actually start taking some action rather than continuing the approach we always see from them, which is to never take responsibility, to blame others and to come up with spin lines to avoid actually doing anything.</p>
  • <p>Just in closing, though, I do want to respond to a couple of the points that Senator Waters has made on behalf of the Greens. In fact, I predicted, as we walked into this chamber, that most of what we would hear from the Greens this morning would be attacks on Labor, and it was, because it always is, because the Greens exist to take votes from Labor, to take seats from Labor and to actually guarantee the re-election of LNP governments.</p>
  • <p>Now, if we needed any proof of that, let's look at the founder of the Greens party, Bob Brown, and what he had to say about the notorious Adani convoy that ran through Queensland last year, contributing to the re-election of this government. He said that he was very proud of the Adani convoy; it had achieved its objective by returning Senator Waters to this chamber. It didn't matter that, in the process, it led to the re-election of an LNP government that even the Greens say is destroying the climate. That wasn't their concern. Their only concern is to come after Labor.</p>
  • <p>As for this notion that the Greens holding the balance of power would be a good thing for the climate, let's just remember the last time there was a Labor government with the Greens in the balance of power in the Senate. They blocked Labor's initiative around the CPRS. Why on earth would you let the Greens have the balance of power if you actually want action on climate change? The only way to have action on climate change is to elect a majority Labor government, and that's exactly what we intend to do at the next election.</p>
  • <p class="speaker">Simon Birmingham</p>
  • <p>We've had a whole wave of posturing from those opposite and certainly bickering between the Greens and the Labor Party. It's a bit like being at a bad family gathering. But the simple fact is: what we have to see and what we are committed to seeing is not the posturing of those opposite nor the bickering of those opposite, but simply calmly getting on with the job of investing in the technologies that reduce emissions whilst protecting the jobs of Australians.</p>
  • <p>Here are three quick facts. Firstly, between 2005 and 2019, Australia's emissions fell faster than Canada's, faster than New Zealand's, faster than Japan's, faster than Korea's and faster than those of the United States. Action in this country is real and is seeing a reduction in emissions. Indeed&#8212;the second fact&#8212;Australia beat our 2020 emissions reduction targets by 459 million tonnes. When we've made commitments to the world, we've honoured them&#8212;we've delivered&#8212;and we've exceeded them, and we are on track to meet and beat our 26 to 28 per cent reduction targets by 2030. Lastly, we are committed to the Paris Agreement and its goals, as well as to achieving net zero emissions as soon as possible. I move:</p>
  • <p class="italic">That the question be now put.</p>
  • <p class="speaker">Scott Ryan</p>
  • <p>The question is that the motion moved by Senator Birmingham, that the question be now put, be agreed to.</p>