Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 10 Hansard (Thursday, 26 August 2004) . . Page.. 4426 ..

emissions in the ACT through a joint emissions reduction scheme with New South Wales. To date there has not been enough commitment on the part of this government or previous governments to do the work necessary to make good their promises on greenhouse matters.

The scheme, as it stands, is not optimal in delivering significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. I would prefer, for example, that emissions were capped and that ceilings could not be exceeded. However, it is a step in the right direction. It is a welcome change to be congratulating the ACT government on being proactive and on working with New South Wales to get the first blocks in place for a national emissions trading scheme—a move from which the federal government has shied away. In this regard New South Wales, and now the ACT, is leading the way nationally. The federal government has been woefully inadequate on climate change issues, in spite of overwhelming evidence from respected health, economic, scientific, and environmental organisations that demonstrate that we must act now to significantly reduce our emissions.

For example, recently the Environment Business journal reported on a leaked Pentagon report that identified climate changes as potentially a greater threat to the planet than terrorism. The Pentagon report noted that climate change should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a United States national security concern. While this bill is obviously not the sole mechanism for the achievement of the territory’s greenhouse gas reduction target, which currently stands at a reduction of net greenhouse emissions to 1990 levels by 2008 and then a further 20 per cent by 2018, I consider that there should be a clear link between the targets included in this bill.

In the ACT electricity use accounts for 59 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions and the territory’s broader greenhouse gas reduction strategies and targets. I am concerned that this bill seeks only to match New South Wales’s attempts to reduce emissions by 5 per cent on a per capita basis by 2007 compared to 1990 levels and then to maintain those levels until 2012, which will achieve about 16 per cent of the territory’s broader target. However, in the interests of getting an emissions reduction scheme off the ground for the ACT and in recognition of the assistance offered by New South Wales in relation to the administration of the scheme, I support this government’s bill. That said, I think it would be a shame to miss a final opportunity to refer in this Assembly to my concern about the progress of this government and the former government on greenhouse issues.

As I noted in the Greens’ recent greenhouse motion, which was supported by Assembly members, this is the time for real effort and action. Climate change is a serious issue that has implications for all aspects of our society. The Australian Climate Group recently released a report urging governments to work with business and the community to take immediate action to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 60 per cent by 2050. The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which includes 2,500 of the world’s top climate scientists, also claims that a 60 per cent reduction in global greenhouse pollution is essential to stabilise atmospheric CO2 and to limit the impacts of climate change.

We are already witnessing the impacts of climate change—heatwaves, floods, increasingly severe droughts and bushfires. Climate change is causing irreversible changes to natural ecosystems, and it is one of the greatest threats facing us globally. The

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .