Page 3231 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 13 November 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
that, on a per capita basis, Australia is cited as the worst greenhouse gas emitter in the developed world?
In terms of the big picture, it is obviously crucially important that developing economies like China, which will replace the US as the greatest emitter of greenhouse gases this year, gets its act together and puts in sustainable improvements to ensure that it does not continue to follow a course of action which will destroy the planet. The same can be said for some other developing economies, like India, Brazil and places like that.
That does not mean that we can be complacent and do nothing just because we emit only 1½ per cent. The ACT emits about five per cent of Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions. There is a lot we can do here: not only to be a model world citizen, but also to use our expertise in Canberra, and indeed in Australia, to develop systems—to use innovation, to use engineers and scientists to develop technology—so that countries around the world can ensure that greenhouse gas emissions drop, and drop as substantially as they need to for this planet to survive as we know it. If that does not happen—and we have only about 10 years; that is what I hear—we are all in very serious trouble indeed.
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change report also tells us that we are amongst the highest users of electricity in the world. We use more than twice as much as people in the European Union. We are a sparsely populated country, so we contribute only 1.5 per cent of those total emissions. But it does matter. Any contribution to reducing greenhouse gases—anywhere, even by a single individual person—is a very good contribution. It is a step in the right direction.
Recently this Assembly considered the utilities bill in relation to the ACT’s participation in a national approach to creating a regular and reliable supply of electricity. In my speech in relation to this bill, I remarked that the ACT government needs to take something more than a piecemeal approach to meeting the challenges of these kinds of issues. Whilst we would like to see the ACT government take a more holistic approach to the question of greenhouse gas emissions, we do applaud its commitment, at least in relation to the aspect of gas emission controls for electricity. Given that electricity accounts for some 60 per cent of the ACT’s greenhouse gas emissions, this commitment by itself is well targeted.
But, as I say, we cannot rest on our laurels. Yes, there are benchmarks for the procurement of green energy. Yes, there are a number of other measures designed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. For example, I note that the act which this bill amends provides for varying greenhouse gas emission benchmarks for 2005, 2006 and 2007 to 2012. They were set when the legislation was introduced in 2004; the bill does fall short here. I will speak to Dr Foskey’s amendments during the detail stage.
The bill does not make any attempt to update targets that were set in 2004. What needs to happen between now and 2010—and happen urgently—is for the government to go and have a little chat to its colleagues in New South Wales and see if, because of our interoperability with them, something can be done on an agreed basis to further enhance the reduction of greenhouse gases before the national scheme comes into play. I do not know what the exact figures are—or indeed should be—but that is something that both governments need to work at.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .