Note: Where available, the PDF/Word icon below is provided to view the complete and fully formatted document
 Download Current HansardDownload Current Hansard    View Or Save XMLView/Save XML

Previous Fragment    Next Fragment
Thursday, 25 June 2009
Page: 7215


Mr KELVIN THOMSON (1:57 PM) —Courtesy of a cold, I have a voice somewhat like the member for Groom, but that is about where the similarity ends. Unlike him, I believe that the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme is extremely important to the future of this country and I believe that Australia has not done anywhere near enough during the course of the last decade to tackle global warming. The member for Groom said that the Carbon Pollution Production Scheme would damage Australia’s competitive position. I point out to the House that, as Lenore Taylor wrote recently, right around the world countries are locked in domestic debates similar to the one underway in Australia. For example, the European Union has promised to cut emissions by at least 20 per cent of 1990 levels by 2020 and that it will cut to 30 per cent if other advanced economies follow suit. New Zealand is reviewing its emissions trading laws and aims to align them with the scheme that emerges in Australia. Canada has committed to reduce emissions by 20 per cent by 2020, but has put its emissions trading laws on hold until the rapidly evolving United States scheme is finalised. Lenore Taylor also reports that China has promised to reduce energy consumption by 20 per cent below 2005 levels by next year and that Indonesia has pledged to reduce emissions from its energy sector to 17 per cent less than they were projected to be in 2025. So this debate is going on around the world. But if the views of the member for Groom were to prevail in these various countries, that would be a recipe for disaster—for floods, for bushfires, for refugees around the world and for us to completely fail to tackle climate change.


The SPEAKER —Order! It being 2 pm, the debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 97. The debate may be resumed at a later hour and the member for Wills will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed.