Senator COLBECK (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance and Administration) (9:55 AM) —It appears that the Greens and, to an extent, the Democrats—but particularly the Greens—think that all industry is bad and it is out there basically to pollute, destroy the environment, gobble up resources and just have no heed for anything that might be in the public or the environmental interest. I remind honourable senators that energy is a significant cost for these businesses.

Senator Allison —Madam Temporary Chairman, I rise on a point of order. That is not what I said in my speech during the second reading debate or in my comments about this bill and our amendments, nor was it anything to do with the question that I put. I ask you to remind the minister that he is suggesting that we are coming from a very different position from the one I outlined. I think this is misleading.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Senator Crossin)—Senator Colbeck.

Senator COLBECK —As I was saying, energy is a significant cost for these businesses and it is in their interest to save energy where they can. That was the point I was getting to, Senator Allison. It is the government’s objective to work with industry to demonstrate to them where the energy savings might be found. In fact, as part of that process, there is a public reporting requirement for industries that are using significant levels of energy to report on the savings that they are finding. Any business that can come up with significant cost savings in respect of energy use would be crazy not to implement them.

I will give you four examples. Xstrata Coal in New South Wales identified 32 projects by January of this year. They include energy savings of 13,686 gigajoules, which is a reduction of more than one per cent in energy use; greenhouse gas reductions of at least 3,700 tonnes of CO2 equivalent per year; and significant cost savings, obviously. Xstrata Copper at its Townsville refinery has found four measures that amount to cost savings of $200,000 a year to the company—a significant saving—and greenhouse gas emission reductions in the order of 3½ thousand tonnes of CO2 equivalent per year if the programs are fully implemented.

Orica has identified 70 projects that represent energy savings of 140,000 gigajoules per year, which is a six per cent reduction in non-feedstock energy use across the site, and greenhouse gas reductions of 9,520 tonnes of CO2 equivalent a year. Those savings are worth in the order of $1 million to the company. Midland Brick has identified over 50 energy efficiency opportunities so far. The major focus has been on two of their kilns. There are energy savings of approximately 270,000 gigajoules per year, equivalent to approximately 19,000 tonnes of CO2 or the energy use of 5,000 households.

There are significant benefits being identified in conjunction with industry. Industry has a significant energy cost. In some of the businesses I have seen, in excess of 35 per cent of the input costs is spent on energy. There are significant savings to be made if industry can maximise their energy efficiency and in so doing generate savings for their businesses.

I do not agree with the assertion being made—I am not saying that it was necessarily just by the Democrats—particularly by Senator Bob Brown, that industry is all bad and greedy. I do not think that is reasonable. Industry has clearly demonstrated that it is prepared to work with the government. There are savings being made, as I have outlined. We ought to encourage industry to continue to work along those lines.