Mr TURNBULL (2:00 PM) —My question is addressed to the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government. I refer to the minister’s statement in the House yesterday that:

Did the minister attend the recent cabinet meeting at which, as reported by Dennis Atkins in the Courier-Mail today, the option was examined to ‘not include fuel transport until at least 2012 in the emissions-trading scheme’?

Mr ALBANESE (Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government) —I thank the member for Wentworth for his question. I am happy to talk about climate change at any time because, unlike those opposite, I have had a consistent position on climate change. Since I arrived in this chamber I have been talking about climate change. Since I arrived in this chamber I have been saying that to address climate change we need a whole-of-government response. That of course must include a response that looks at transport. Transport produces about 14 per cent of our total emissions and therefore we need to consider transport as an option. But there has been some confusion from those opposite about transport and climate change. Last night I watched The 7.30 Report. Forget Grey’s Anatomy; last night we had ‘Greg’s Anatomy’ all over Kerry O’Brien’s desk as the member for Flinders dissembled on climate change. He argued that, yes, climate change was important and, yes, transport should be considered as part of it but, no, the opposition are not really sure what their position is. That is what the member for Flinders said. Then I thought: The 7.30 Report is a tough gig sometimes with Kerry O’Brien and it might get better overnight. So I listened to AM this morning.

Mr Hockey —Mr Speaker, I rise on a point of order. It was a very specific question and I do not see any part of it referring to alternative views.

The SPEAKER —Order! There is no point of order. I will listen very carefully and the minister knows he is obliged to be relevant to the question.

Mr ALBANESE —I certainly am being relevant, Mr Speaker. The question was about climate change and transport and I am happy to talk about climate change and transport. When those opposite do interviews—whether it is on The 7.30 Report, sweating more than a sumo wrestler in a sauna, or on AM—after having listened to those interviews, I have no idea what their position is.

Mr Hockey —Mr, Speaker, I raise a point of order. We are asking for the minister’s view, not his opinion of someone else’s view.

The SPEAKER —Order! There is no point of order. I will listen closely to the minister. The minister will bring his answer to a conclusion.

Mr ALBANESE —The fact is that the shadow minister has at least six positions that he has put forward on climate change—more positions than the Kama Sutra.

Dr Jensen —Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. The member was not asked for alternative policy.

The SPEAKER —Order! There is no point of order. I will listen very carefully to the minister and I suggest that he comes to his conclusion.

Mr ALBANESE —Come in spinner—the man who wants to address climate change from space! That is their solution.

The SPEAKER —Order! The minister will ignore other members and get back to the question.

Mr ALBANESE —When it comes to transport, we on this side of the House are taking action. We have the green car plan and we have cleaner fuels. We on this side of the House understand the need to address transport and climate change in our cities. Whether it be the urban congestion of cars going nowhere and emitting greenhouse gases or the public transport in our cities, we are addressing transport and climate change across the board.

Mr Turnbull —Mr Speaker, on relevance: the honourable member could at least refer to the cabinet meeting which I asked him about.

The SPEAKER —Order! There is no point of order. The minister has the call and he will bring his answer to a conclusion.

Mr ALBANESE —I was quite happy to talk about what we are doing on transport and climate change. What I will not do—and they know I will not do it, as they did not—is discuss cabinet meetings. They know that. They know the question is out of order. They know that I would be breaching the law to talk about what happens at cabinet meetings. My position on climate change is very clear, as is the position of the Rudd Labor government. We will take action—as we did with the first act of this new government, which was to ratify the Kyoto protocol. We will take action, we will continue to take action and we will do this to redress the 12 years of inaction and denial from those opposite.