Senator JOYCE (Leader of the Nationals in the Senate) (10:53 AM) —Give me two minutes and then, to assist Senator Milne—

Senator Milne —I rise on a point of order. Mr Chair, with respect, I do not think this has been handled in a very fair way. It is now 55 minutes into my amendment. I was very brief in moving my amendment—five minutes at most—and there has been a filibuster on both sides, with one responding to the other. Either we have a filibuster, and I get my 20 minutes to filibuster, or we move this amendment and debate the science, where we might have a more lengthy discussion. I do not think it is fair to just keep going backwards and forwards between the coalition and the government.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Senator Mark Bishop)—There is no point of order, Senator Milne; you know that.

Senator JOYCE —With respect, I will be very brief. I just want to get a few things clearly on the record. There you have it: we asked two simple questions about how much, in parts per million, the Australian scheme will reduce carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by. And you saw it: the minister did not answer the question. She did not answer it. I told you that she would then go on to make calamitous statements. And what did she do? Precisely that: she went on through a whole diatribe of calamitous statements.

We asked another simple question on behalf of the Australian people: how much will this reduce the temperature of the globe by? I told you that she would not answer the question. I put the question forward and you all heard it. Of course, she did not answer the question. Ladies and gentlemen, members and senators and whoever is listening out there, that is the course of this debate. Now you are starting to understand how we see it. Now you are starting to understand how the Labor Party just do not answer the questions. All they give you are emotive statements to try, by guile and cunning, to get this massive new tax in place.

The minister then went on to the statements about Garnaut and the proposition of temperatures increasing by six degrees. I am not a scientist. I am not here to discuss that. I listen to scientists. I listen to the balance of opinion. But now we have also seen, from the East Anglia Research Unit—where we have Professor Trembath, Phil Jones and people who are at the very top, who are the grand architects of the papers that determined the IPCC’s approach—their absolute misleading of people. And when John L Daly died in Launceston in 2004 Professor Phil Jones said that he cheered. He cheered that a sceptic had died.

So this is the other side of the debate that I am happy for the scientists to have. But we have put the questions to the minister and the Australian people now have it on the record. Nothing needs to be said except that the minister will not answer the questions.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN —We are dealing with Australian Green amendment (12) on sheet 5786.

Question negatived.