Senator CAMERON (8:25 PM) —Senator Cormann is doing exactly what we would expect from him. The Liberals have elected an extremist leader today and Senator Cormann is part of the extreme group in this Senate who want to ensure that we do not tackle climate change.

What we are hearing from Senator Cormann is typical of the Liberal Party in this country. They are now a group of extremists, run by extremists, taking extremist positions on a whole range of legislation. It will not simply be the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme—the working families of Australia will need to look at what this opposition is doing.

With the CPRS, we are taking every step that is right and proper to ensure that Australia plays its part in reducing carbon pollution around the world. The Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme is a—

Senator Xenophon —Mr Temporary Chairman, on a point of order: I raise the question of relevance to the amendment before us, which is about carbon sink forests.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Senator Forshaw)—The debate has ranged rather widely over quite a number of days. For the last three quarters of an hour, we have managed to stick to the amendments before us and I must say that we are actually debating the Greens amendment, but Senator Cameron is in order. There is no point of order.

Senator CAMERON —I am really surprised at Senator Xenophon raising the issue of relevance in this debate. The issues that Senator Xenophon has raised in the past would lead me to believe that Senator Xenophon believes in the magic pudding in relation to carbon pollution reduction in this country. This is not about a magic pudding. This is about doing what is right for this country. This is about doing what is right for the nation—something that the opposition are not prepared to do and something that the opposition are determined to walk away from. They are walking away from it because they want to pursue the fear and smear campaign that the opposition are renowned for in this country.

This amendment will not deliver the ongoing suite of changes that is required to ensure that we deal comprehensively with a reduction in carbon pollution in this country. Carbon sinks are one aspect of a whole suite of reductions in CO2 emissions that we are seeking to achieve.

I have been overseas recently. I was lucky enough to go overseas and see what is happening in the rest of the world. Talking to the Commonwealth countries around the world, who are concerned about their future and about ensuring that they can reduce their carbon footprint, I was quite interested to see that David Cameron, the Leader of the Opposition in the UK, takes a much more progressive position.

Honourable senators interjecting—

Senator CAMERON —He is no relation to me, I can tell you. He must come from the black Cameron side. He is no relation to me.

Senator Back —Is he a rebel though?

Senator CAMERON —You guys are the rabble.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN —Order! I will determine who is the rabble here. Senator Cameron, you have the floor and other senators should cease interjecting.

Senator CAMERON —I will take up that interjection about rabble. Let me tell you that I have never seen such a rabble as we have witnessed with the coalition over the last week. Here we are discussing serious issues about reducing the carbon footprint of this country, yet what do we have opposite? We have a coalition that are interested in ripping each other apart and putting an extremist at the head of their party, an extremist who is prepared to take rights away from workers but not to address the issue of carbon pollution reduction and deal with the real issues that are affecting working families in this country. What could be more important than dealing with the issue of reducing the carbon footprint in this country?

We do not believe that reducing the taxation effectiveness of these carbon sink forests will do the business. We do not believe that should happen. We believe that the tax deductions are an incentive to grow forests for the purpose of reducing carbon dioxide. It is about time that the coalition actually dealt with the real issues and actually tried to come up with a policy, instead of coming in here and talking for hour after endless hour on a filibuster until they change their leadership, until they get an extremist leadership in there that is prepared to walk away from the real issues that are affecting ordinary Australians, walk away from future generations and walk away from the needs of the children and grandchildren of this country. That is what they are doing: walking away from the real needs of this country in terms of reducing its carbon footprint.

The Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme has had more inquiries than you can poke a stick at. I have been on three of them and I have witnessed every senior and effective scientist come to those committees and indicate that we must do something to reduce our carbon footprint. What we must do is continue to give incentives throughout the community and throughout industry to make sure that we actually target the need to reduce carbon pollution in this country. What we are doing by opposing the removal of the tax deduction is giving farmers a reason to get in there and help reduce the carbon pollution in this country.

We hear all of the rhetoric from the coalition, but when I was overseas recently I spoke to a former prime minister of Kiribati and he indicated that they were desperately concerned about what was happening in the Pacific islands through global warming, which it seems to me the majority of coalition senators deny is happening. The coalition are the climate change deniers, the climate change sceptics and the climate change vandals in this country. They have got no credibility in terms of their position in relation to carbon pollution reduction. They have got no credibility as a real opposition in this country. They have been nothing but a rabble over the period of time since they determined that Malcolm Turnbull, the member for Wentworth, had to go. They determined he had to go because he was taking a progressive position, he was not a conservative, he was not going to do their bidding, and he was not going to buckle under.

Senator Cormann —Mr Temporary Chairman, on a point of order: even with the broadest interpretation of relevance, I fail to understand how this is relevant to the Greens amendment before the chair.

The TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN (Senator Humphries)—Senator Cameron, you should remain relevant to the amendment before the chair.

Senator CAMERON —I am just responding to the political comment Senator Cormann made when he stood up earlier. If it is good for one side, it should be good for the other side, but I take your point. In relation to where this government stands on reducing carbon pollution, we are the leaders in this country in dealing with the issues. We are the only government that has stood up and said that we must do something about it and has come up with a plan to deal with it. Part of that plan is to make sure that we do provide the incentives and that there will be a tax deduction and an incentive to—

Senator Bob Brown —Mr Temporary Chairman, on a point of order: I did not think we would end with a government filibuster, but that is what we are getting. I think the government members should hear it, so I draw your attention to the state of the house. (Quorum formed)

Senator CAMERON —I indicate again that we do not support this amendment from the Greens. There is a need to deal with carbon pollution, to provide those incentives and to ensure that there is tax effectiveness in terms of growing forests for the specific purpose of reducing carbon dioxide. As you are aware, the previous Senate inquiry found that carbon sink forest tax legislation is a valuable policy addition that will promote greenhouse gas reductions. If we do not promote the greenhouse gas reductions by giving some support through the taxation system, it would be a negative for the overall scheme and that is why we do not support this amendment.