Climate Change: Carbon Pollution Reduction SchemeWednesday, November 25, 2009 Government Motion I am pleased to contribute to the debate today on this motion. Let me put on the record at the outset that I believe our climate is changing and that humans are contributing to that.
We have a very important issue before us today: the issue of climate change; how we reduce greenhouse gas emissions; and how we transition to a low carbon future. They are absolutely critical issues, and what the Victorian Parliament needs to particularly focus on is how we can contribute to an effective transition to a low carbon environment while we make sure that we protect Victorian jobs, Victorian industries and protect the quality of life of Victorian families. These are not easy questions, and they need to be taken genuinely and seriously in this debate. I have been very concerned about the quality of the debate from the other side because they have focused more on the politics than on the substance of these issues.
One of the very difficult issues unfortunately, though, with having this debate at this time is we are calling for the debate on this issue when we do not have the facts on the table in relation to the impact on the Victorian economy, and that is at two levels. Firstly, as the Leader of the Opposition laid out, the Legislative Council in April and May resolved that the government should table documents relating to the carbon pollution reduction scheme (CPRS). Even now there are 111 documents that have not been provided to the Parliament on the grounds of executive privilege, and there are 17 personal briefings to the Premier. There are evaluations, there are briefing papers -- many documents -- and we think it is important that the Victorian Parliament and the Victorian people should have access to the best thinking from the government's advisers about the genuine impact on the Victorian economy. Secondly, the amendments are only 24 hours old. They are not even tabled yet in the federal Parliament, and we do not know the implications of the amendments that will be tabled and the adjustments that have been achieved, and how that translates through to the Victorian economy. We think they are very positive, but we do not have at hand information of the impact today. Unfortunately what we have are predictions of dire circumstances for the Victorian economy. We do not yet know the modelling that has been done to be able to understand how that translates, but what we have heard is that there is going to be an increase in cost to Victorian households of about $7 per week; there is going to be a cost to the Victorian economy of over $850 million by 2021; there will be a 1.8 per cent decrease in employment in Gippsland and the closure of brown coal generators.
This is what is in some of the documentation being put out there from some of the work that has been done by our economic modellers. What we need to know from the government is what its advice is, and we also need to know the implications of the amendments that have now been agreed by both parties in the federal Parliament. I would like to congratulate Malcolm Turnbull, Ian Macfarlane and the federal coalition on what they have achieved in championing additional support for important aspects of the industry in relation to CPRS. In terms of the amendments that have been put on the table, we see there will be greater protection for emission-intensive trade-exposed industries, the exclusion of agriculture, a greater number of permits for electricity generators and greater assistance to groups like Victorian manufacturing industries as a result of the cost increases on prices.
The coalition has, through these negotiations, brought greater protection and greater support to Victorian industries as a result, and I congratulate them on what they have achieved. Once we know the impact -- and we are waiting for that, and I follow the Leader of the Opposition's call for the Premier to table those documents today -- we have to understand how we can effectively mitigate that impact, as I have flagged. I want to flag one particular group that has not been mentioned in debate at this point. I want to talk particularly about vulnerable communities and vulnerable Victorians. What we do know is that lower income households are going to be hardest hit, and that has been confirmed in the briefing to the Treasurer that was also referred to by the Leader of the Opposition. The Victorian Council of Social Service (VCOSS) has made some recommendations.
We have to particularly understand that those who are disadvantaged in our community are going to be highly impacted by the introduction of a CPRS, and we should do all we can to mitigate that. VCOSS recommends that energy and water pricing should be affordable; incentives, rebates and assistance programs must be in place and must be targeted; and there must be auditing and energy efficient retrofits to these households. One example that they propose, for example, is for renters, who are often on low incomes and who cannot necessarily compel landlords to make those retrofits which would make a significant difference in the increased costs they are facing as a result of the CPRS. Let us take a moment also to look at the Brumby government's performance in some of these areas. We have a list of the programs and initiatives, but what we have not seen is some of the reality.
Under the Kyoto rules Victoria is the second worst state in attempting to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and we have not seen leadership from the government in relation to putting in place initiatives within its own public service. One example is that public servants are using more cars and are not using public transport. You would think the government would show a real commitment and the necessary leadership to make it happen within its own patch, but we are seeing the opposite. Government performance and its lack of leadership has been slammed by the government's own independent commissioner for environmental sustainability. We need to see some commitment from the government in its own backyard, introducing similar pressures to those it is putting on the broader Victorian community.
The opposition believes the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and the transition to a low carbon environment are absolutely critical issues for the Victorian Parliament, for Victorian businesses and for Victorian families and the community as a whole. The opposition in coalition is not opposing this motion today, but is disappointed, as I have laid out, that a genuine debate about achieving that transition, achieving a low carbon environment and managing that to achieve good outcomes for the Victorian community as a whole, could not have been conducted. Unfortunately the government has now allowed that debate to take place, but we welcome that debate and we welcome the future of the Victorian economy being positive, with jobs and opportunities for Victorian families in a low carbon environment.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| [ Copyright Mary Wooldridge © 2009 | Privacy | Disclaimer | Website by Peter Wiseman | Admin ] |
