

- Title
BILLS
Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Bill 2011, Carbon Credits (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2011, Australian National Registry of Emissions Units Bill 2011
In Committee
- Database
Senate Hansard
- Date
18-08-2011
- Source
Senate
- Parl No.
43
- Electorate
- Interjector
- Page
4841
- Party
ALP
- Presenter
- Status
Final
- Question No.
- Questioner
- Responder
- Speaker
Ludwig, Sen Joe
- Stage
In Committee
- Type
- Context
BILLS
- System Id
chamber/hansards/9ad85bef-6cdf-4332-894f-15d4be804a7b/0133
Previous Fragment Next Fragment
-
Hansard
- Start of Business
- BILLS
- COMMITTEES
- BUSINESS
- NOTICES
- COMMITTEES
- MOTIONS
- COMMITTEES
- MOTIONS
- COMMITTEES
- BILLS
- MOTIONS
- COMMITTEES
-
BILLS
- Australian Energy Market Amendment (National Energy Retail Law) Bill 2011, Competition and Consumer Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2011, Competition and Consumer Legislation Amendment Bill 2011, Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2011, Tax Laws Amendment (2011 Measures No. 6) Bill 2011
- Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (National Regulator) Bill 2011, Offshore Petroleum (Royalty) Amendment Bill 2011
- COMMITTEES
- BUSINESS
-
BILLS
- Indigenous Education (Targeted Assistance) Amendment Bill 2011
- Statute Stocktake Bill (No. 1) 2011
-
Carbon Credits (Carbon Farming Initiative) Bill 2011, Carbon Credits (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2011, Australian National Registry of Emissions Units Bill 2011
-
In Committee
- Bishop, Sen Mark
- Birmingham, Sen Simon
- Ludwig, Sen Joe
- Birmingham, Sen Simon
- Birmingham, Sen Simon
- Colbeck, Sen Richard
- Birmingham, Sen Simon
- Ludwig, Sen Joe
- Birmingham, Sen Simon
- Ludwig, Sen Joe
- Division
- Xenophon, Sen Nick
- Milne, Sen Christine
- Birmingham, Sen Simon
- Ludwig, Sen Joe
- Xenophon, Sen Nick
-
In Committee
-
QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE
-
Carbon Pricing
(Ryan, Sen Scott, Wong, Sen Penny) -
Education and Health Funding
(Gallacher, Sen Alex, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Carbon Pricing
(Eggleston, Sen Alan, Wong, Sen Penny) -
Asylum Seekers
(Hanson-Young, Sen Sarah, Carr, Sen Kim) -
Carbon Pricing
(Fierravanti-Wells, Sen Concetta, Wong, Sen Penny) -
Carbon Pricing
(Marshall, Sen Gavin, Carr, Sen Kim) -
Carbon Pricing
(McKenzie, Sen Bridget, Ludwig, Sen Joe) -
Apple Imports
(Xenophon, Sen Nick, Ludwig, Sen Joe)
-
Carbon Pricing
- QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: ADDITIONAL ANSWERS
- QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE: TAKE NOTE OF ANSWERS
- MATTERS OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE
- MINISTERIAL STATEMENTS
- DOCUMENTS
- BILLS
- DOCUMENTS
- COMMITTEES
- BUSINESS
- BILLS
- FIRST SPEECH
- PARLIAMENTARY REPRESENTATION
- DOCUMENTS
- COMMITTEES
- AUDITOR-GENERAL'S REPORTS
- ADJOURNMENT
- DOCUMENTS
-
QUESTIONS ON NOTICE
-
Defence: Naval Vessels (Question No. 483)
(Johnston, Sen David, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Defence: Reserves and Contractors (Question No. 509)
(Johnston, Sen David, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Defence: Child Minding Expenses (Question No. 519)
(Johnston, Sen David, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Defence (Question No. 520)
(Johnston, Sen David, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Defence: Hospitality (Question No. 521)
(Johnston, Sen David, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Defence: Hospitality (Question No. 531)
(Johnston, Sen David, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Defence: Gifts Policy (Question No. 574)
(Ludlam, Sen Scott, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Afghanistan: Depleted Uranium Munitions (Question No. 577)
(Ludlam, Sen Scott, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Attorney-General: Staffing (Question No. 625)
(Siewert, Sen Rachel, Ludwig, Sen Joe) -
Defence: Submarines (Question No. 634)
(Johnston, Sen David, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Defence (Question No. 713)
(Johnston, Sen David, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Defence: Staffing (Question No. 730)
(Johnston, Sen David, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Defence: Staffing (Question No. 731)
(Johnston, Sen David, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Defence: Staffing (Question No. 732)
(Johnston, Sen David, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Defence: Staffing (Question No. 733)
(Johnston, Sen David, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Defence: Staffing (Question No. 734)
(Johnston, Sen David, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Defence (Question No. 790)
(Johnston, Sen David, Evans, Sen Christopher) -
Australian Water Licences (Question No. 834)
(Birmingham, Sen Simon, Conroy, Sen Stephen) -
Defence: Aircraft (Question No. 838)
(Abetz, Sen Eric, Evans, Sen Christopher)
-
Defence: Naval Vessels (Question No. 483)
Page: 4841
Senator LUDWIG (Queensland—Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry, Manager of Government Business in the Senate and Minister Assisting the Attorney-General on Queensland Floods Recovery) (13:29): I understand the amendment. The government does not support it. This amendment would effectively allow Greenhouse Friendly companies to receive CFI credits for abatement right back to 2008. The CFI does allow some backdating which goes back to 1 July 2010. This is a new piece of legislation designed to assist the farming community. Further backdating to 2008 could literally undermine the environmental integrity and value of the CFI credits. This legislation is designed to ensure that we do have integrity within this system. In looking at this issue though, the government will consider options for including some or all Greenhouse Friendly credits under the National Carbon Offset Standard for a transitional period. So it is not all bad news. This would increase the value of Greenhouse Friendly credits.
In this area, the government's view is that you are in the wrong place. I understand what you are trying to do, but it is about the Carbon Farming Initiative and it is about ensuring that we have a system that allows backdating to 1 July 2010 and that we use the methodologies under this to assist the co-benefits, which I described earlier, in the agricultural areas. But in dealing with Greenhouse Friendly companies, who have those types of things out there, the place to deal with the Greenhouse Friendly credits is under the National Carbon Offset Standard. That legislation is coming before this parliament, so it is not something that we are putting off. A much better opportunity to use that type of action again—in other words, this type of amendment—would be in the guidelines or in the next piece of legislation. That is by way of suggestion. I am trying to gabble with your amendment. We oppose it.