|
senate vote 2023-10-16#4
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2024-01-26 21:14:19
|
Title
Matters of Urgency — Environment- Matters of Urgency - Environment - Make climate pollution a compulsory consideration
Description
<p class="speaker">Andrew McLachlan</p><p>Senator McKim has submitted a proposal under standing order 75 today:</p>-
- The majority voted against a [motion](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?id=2023-10-16.132.2) introduced by SA Senator [Sarah Hanson-Young](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/sa/sarah_hanson-young) (Greens), which means it failed.
- ### Motion text
- > *That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:*
- >
- > *The Environment Minister continues to approve new coal and gas projects without having to consider the climate damage they will create. In the face of the climate and biodiversity crises, national environment laws must be urgently fixed to ensure the Environment Minister cannot ignore climate pollution when giving environment approvals.*
<p class="italic">Pursuant to standing order 75, I give notice that today the Australian Greens propose to move "That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:</p><p class="italic">The Environment Minister continues to approve new coal and gas projects without having to consider the climate damage they will create. In the face of the climate and biodiversity crises, national environment laws must be urgently fixed to ensure the Environment Minister cannot ignore climate pollution when giving environment approvals."</p><p>Is consideration of the proposal supported?</p><p class="italic"> <i>More than the number of senators required by the standing orders having risen in their places—</i></p><p>With the concurrence of the Senate, the clerks will set the clock in line with the informal arrangements made by the whips.</p> <p class="speaker">Sarah Hanson-Young</p><p>At the request of Senator McKim, I move:</p><p class="italic">That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:</p><p class="italic">The Environment Minister continues to approve new coal and gas projects without having to consider the climate damage they will create. In the face of the climate and biodiversity crises, national environment laws must be urgently fixed to ensure the Environment Minister cannot ignore climate pollution when giving environment approvals.</p><p>I rise to speak to this very important matter, and I would like to ensure that, as we debate this issue today, people understand the real urgency of this matter. We have environment laws in this country that allow for the environment minister, when giving approval for new projects—whether it's a mine or a new gas well—to not even consider the climate impacts of such projects. We live in an era of climate crisis and biodiversity crisis. We are edging quickly this year to a summer that is going to be absolutely horrible—hotter, drier and more extreme. And yet we have laws in this country that do not even consider how those climate fires and the climate crisis are being made worse by the expansion of fossil fuels.</p><p>Every new coal or gas project risks the future of our Murray-Darling Basin, the food bowl of our nation. Every new coal or gas project puts our reef at risk. Every new coal or gas project risks the future of our children. Every new coal or gas project puts Australia's risk of more frequent, more devastating and more dreadful bushfires nearer and nearer in front of us. Every new coal or gas project fuels extinction. Australia was the first country to record mammal extinction as a result of climate change, and we can't afford any more. Australia was one of the first countries to really experience the extreme weather events of the bushfires and of the floods this millennia. And we know that those extreme weather events are made worse and worse by the climate crisis.</p><p>Every time a new coalmine or a new gas mine is opened up or expanded, it is making our climate crisis worse. This year the environment minister, whose job it is to protect the environment, has given the stamp of approval to not just one but two, three, four, at least five fossil fuel projects that are fuelling the climate crisis and will make this summer's bushfires worse—just this year. And the reason is that we have environment laws that ignore the climate damage and climate risk of pollution from coal and gas.</p><p>We urgently need to fix this. We cannot rely on the goodwill of government to deny approval to these projects; we've seen that. We know that the fossil fuel lobby in this country is too strong, is still calling the shots and is still applying pressure to members of parliament and government. In 2023, as we face an even worsening climate, it is time to fix these laws and make the minister do her job.</p> <p class="speaker">Jonathon Duniam</p><p>At the outset I want to recommit the coalition's view that, when it comes to environmental laws, we need to have balance. We need to balance economic needs against environmental needs and make sure we have an economy that's functioning while we have an environment that sustains life. That is paramount in this debate, and it sometimes gets lost. We shouldn't have it too far one way or too far the other way.</p><p>This motion doesn't achieve balance. There is inflammatory language, and at the end of the day, as evidenced by what we've just heard and, indeed, from some of the remarks earlier in the day, it is leading us to a point that is really just about saying no to these projects. They'll say it's about assessments but they will say it is all about 'no' at the end of it: 'We just don't want these projects to happen.' That doesn't take account—</p> <p class="speaker">Janet Rice</p><p>Yes, that's right! We're in a crisis!</p> <p class="speaker">Helen Polley</p><p>Senator Rice!</p> <p class="speaker">Jonathon Duniam</p><p>Senator Rice, who has been interjecting—and I know you are about to call her up, Acting Deputy President Polley—says, 'Yes, that's right.' But that attitude and argument does not take account of the fact that we as a society require energy to sustain jobs, to live, to run hospitals, to keep the lights on. That is the terrible approach that's been taken by the Australian Greens, which does not achieve balance. That is why we won't be supporting a political motion of this nature.</p><p>Having said all that, and despite the fact that such an approach would be bad for Australia in so many ways right across the country—particularly in the regions, I might add—there is a lot more at play here which is cause for concern in relation to our environmental laws. It was quite clear today; in listening to an answer that was given to a question asked by Senator Hanson-Young about reforms—and this very issue, as a matter of fact—it was apparent to me that the government is considering going down this pathway or a version of what's being proposed. Of course, the Greens would like to have it happen tomorrow. The government is working through its protracted, delayed and blown-out process. But, at the end of the day, it looks very much like another deal has been done between Labor and the Greens. We will see the detail of that over time.</p><p>I want to talk more broadly about the issue we face with environmental laws in this country. Senator Hanson-Young makes some very valid points around the fact that the laws aren't fit for purpose. They need reform; the Samuel review said so and the minister said so. I will never forget that Press Club address that Minister Plibersek gave, talking about the urgent need to act on environmental law reform, to protect our environment, to stop extinctions, to make sure the laws are fit for purpose, to provide certainty to business, the community and the environmental movement and to have streamlined processes. It was all very urgent.</p><p>All of that seems to have just been words, because, despite those calls for urgent action and a commitment by the minister that things would get cracking—'we don't have a day to waste'—despite the commitment to zero new extinctions, despite the commitment to 30 per cent of land being preserved for conservation purposes by 2030 and despite all of the other commitments that have been made, we are still nowhere near conclusion on reform of environmental laws. Again, Senator Hanson-Young's good work revealed that there's at least a 12-month delay in the government's efforts to reform these laws. So this is far from a need for urgent action and the government firing on all cylinders to reform this area of work. We are now around two years behind schedule on these reforms. They were announced and they were going to happen—we'd be fixing everything, we'd be stopping extinctions and we'd have a clearer pathway for businesses to seek approvals to do anything—but now that's another two years off.</p><p>That's why I look at this motion, which is kind of odd given there is a position in this chamber to not deal with the nature repair market legislation before we see the full suite of environmental law reforms in this country. That's a wise course of action, because we very much have a scrambled egg when it comes to the EPBC Act, which we are seeking to reform, yet the government is trying to stack up schemes and programs that will no doubt be out of date by the time these laws have passed because the basic laws we need to reform in this place will change. The motion here today, and the legislation that I understand has just been introduced, is another version of that too.</p><p>We're tinkering around the edges rather than the government getting on and doing what they promised they would do as a matter of urgency, which is reforming national environmental laws. The changes need to happen at the base level. We need to get the basics right. The environmental laws need to happen. I have not heard from the government about what they intend to do. Others have and some in the community have, but the opposition hasn't. <i>(Time expired)</i></p> <p class="speaker">Linda White</p><p>Contrary to the assertions made by the Greens Party in the chamber today, the federal Labor government is committed to bringing down emissions and protecting our natural environment. The evidence of this commitment exists in the statute books, the pieces of legislation made law often with the support of the Greens, who have brought this motion to the Senate today. It's true that we worked with the Greens to implement a climate target to legislate a net zero commitment and to legislate a climate safeguard mechanism.</p><p>But, as is usual when it comes to motions moved by the Greens, the bigger picture of what the government has achieved and the evidence of the government's commitment to climate reform and environmental protection has been ignored. For example, it's still true that any decision taken by the climate and energy minister when considering coal and gas projects must comply with emissions targets and our net zero commitment. Our climate safeguard laws were introduced to ensure that any new projects emitting over 100,000 tonnes of emissions must cut those emissions by up to 4.9 per cent per year or offset those emissions. This also applies to the 215 largest polluting sites in Australia and acts as a five-year rolling cap.</p><p>The government's whole environmental and energy transition framework is concentrated on locating an appropriate balance, which requires the climate minister to assess whether new fossil fuel developments are consistent with the goal of bringing down industrial emissions. That was the point of the safeguard mechanism that we developed with the Greens and the Independents. In that vein, it is clear to everyone that our transition to net zero emissions and renewable energy is a massive job. Transitioning smoothly towards meeting our targets is an economic challenge, as well as an environmental one. Getting to 82 per cent renewable energy by 2030 is still the government's commitment, and that shows Labor is serious about addressing climate change.</p><p>But, of course, the necessary transition can't happen overnight. Nevertheless, we have ramped up approval of renewable projects, which have almost doubled, with 104 projects in the pipeline to date. In fact, just this week, the government approved the biggest battery project in Asia, and a few weeks ago a massive new solar farm at Smoky Creek in Queensland was given the green light, which will produce enough power for around 200,000 households, with a million megawatts of more power entering the grid. These are just two of 37 renewable energy projects that have been approved since Labor came to office and acted quickly to renew the Commonwealth's focus on our renewable energy transition. In relation to the transition, I acknowledge that in the recent past things haven't moved as quickly as some would hope, but the sad fact is that we have had more than a decade of political fighting that has cost us much in our energy transition and action on climate change. Because of the infighting in the coalition and the single-mindedness of the Greens, emissions have been higher for longer and the delivery of certainty for renewable energy projects looking to invest in upscaling clean energy was set back.</p><p>In their time in government, the coalition had 22 failed energy policies, which got us nowhere. They harboured in their party, and still do harbour, climate denialists who would happily see all our good work on climate change undermined and reversed. Of course, how could we forget the greatest betrayal of all when it came to the climate future of Australians, when the Greens and the coalition teamed up to sink Labor's Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme when we were last in government? It was a tragic moment for our nation when the odd bedfellows of the coalition and the Greens got together to sink a good policy which by now would have prevented more than 80 million tonnes of emissions being released into the atmosphere.</p><p>After this decade of lost policy and missed opportunities, Australians rightly had had a gutful and chose to elect a Labor government in 2022. We acted almost immediately to implement our ambitious climate agenda, including capping emissions, legislating net zero and reshaping the tone of the debate around climate policy in Australia to acknowledge that the economic challenges of transitioning our country towards renewable energy were something we could no longer shy away from. It is in that spirit that the government will continue to act, striking the balance and building the framework for a clean energy future where fossil fuel developments are held up to the light and measured against our legislated targets and renewable energy commitments. The agenda of renewable energy development and ending the climate wars will rightly be at the forefront of the government's agenda now and in the future.</p> <p class='motion-notice motion-notice-truncated'>Long debate text truncated.</p>-
-
|