Page 300 - Week 01 - Thursday, 15 December 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
become the key protagonists as national governments fail to take effective climate action.
We will do the work to highlight whether we can transition to net zero emissions in an earlier time frame than 2050. We will conduct an extensive and inclusive consultation process and get the best information and analysis for this work. The successful path to zero net emissions will need to be a partnership between the community, the business sector and all parts of the government. There is also a national climate policy review being undertaken in 2017. The ACT government will work to influence the outcome of this review and ensure that it leads to more ambitious action on climate change and contributes to a more resilient future for us all.
MS LE COUTEUR (Murrumbidgee) (4.31): I want to make some brief remarks about this.
Firstly, Mr Hanson interjected to say that this was really just an attempt to deny electricity to the people of India. Nothing could be further from the truth. I happen to have with me an article from the Guardian from October. It quotes Tim Buckley, from the Institute of Energy Economics and Financial Analysis. He points out that the Indian energy minister, Piyush Goyal, has vowed that India will cease all coal imports within three years. That is a matter of public record. That is what India is planning to do.
What is the reason why India can be so confident in planning to do this? Tim has given the prices of solar power and coal. The cost of new solar power is less than the cost of new coal. It is 4.5 rupees per kilowatt hour for solar compared to six rupees for imported coal. Coal from Australia is not going to solve energy issues for India. The Indians know that, and it would be great if the Australians worked that one out as well.
As Minister Gentleman said, Ms Lee, there is a reason for the ACT to be concerned about this. We share the same atmosphere. We share the same climate. We do not live in a little bubble by ourselves here in the ACT. This is something that is overall a very bad thing, for the reasons that Mr Rattenbury and Mr Gentleman have discussed. But just from our point of view as taxpayers it is a pretty lousy deal, too. Is there any reason to think that the Adani coalmine will pay the full company tax rate in Australia? First, will they make a profit in Australia? And if they do, will they sell through their other entities in tax havens like the Cayman Islands and Singapore? From a straight economic point of view, if an additional 60 million tonnes a year of subsidised coal comes out from Adani, will this, in fact, from Australia’s point of view, just replace other coal exports and so be a no-win game for Australia economically, apart from being clearly a very bad deal from an environmental point of view?
My last point is from an environmental point of view. I had the privilege in 2013 of visiting the parts of Queensland where the mine would be constructed if it is constructed. I thought before I went that they would be clapped out bits of desert. But no, they are not. There is beautiful, fertile agricultural land over much of it. It would be a real shame for Australia and the world if this mine goes ahead.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video