Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2022 Week 12 Hansard (Wednesday, 30 November 2022) . . Page.. 4035 ..
reinforce that commitment to action in reducing emissions and undertaking adaptation and let the community having a good line of sight on what those activities are.
I commend the bill to the Assembly.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Clauses 1 to 7, by leave, taken together and agreed to.
Proposed new clause 7A.
MS LEE (Kurrajong-Leader of the Opposition) (11.52): I move amendment No 1 circulated in my name, which inserts a new clause 7A [see schedule 1 at page 4093], and table a supplementary explanatory statement to the amendments.
Clause 7A will introduce a requirement for the minister to report annually on the cost effectiveness of government actions taken to reduce greenhouse gas emissions such as the cost per time of greenhouse emission reduction activities. The intent of this amendment is to enhance our understanding of what works well and what does not when it comes to emissions reduction.
Feedback that I have received from the community, from stakeholders and sometimes from the minister himself in fact is that meeting our 2025 emissions reduction target of 50 per cent to 60 per cent below 1990 levels will be a challenge and it will be a challenge going forward. Providing clear information to the community not only about how we are progressing toward achieving our targets but the effectiveness of specific measures in decreasing our emissions as well as their cost effectiveness is a critical tool in designing and assessing successful climate policies.
I think it is very reasonable to expect that policy measures taken with a goal of achieving outcomes would be assessed to ensure that they are working as intended. This holds true for climate action also. I commend my amendment to the Assembly.
MR RATTENBURY (Kurrajong—Attorney-General, Minister for Consumer Affairs, Minister for Gaming and Minister for Water, Energy and Emissions Reduction) (11.54): Ms Lee has a number of amendments. I will make an overarching comment which is that I have had a careful look at them and they are ideas the government has contemplated. We are not supporting the amendments but I have detailed reasons for each and I will come to those as we get to them.
On this first amendment I understand the cost for tonne of abatement is a useful measure in many circumstances. The government certainly does consider it when bringing individual measures forward but it is also not relevant to every measure. For example, the long term nature of many of our emissions reduction efforts and the complexity involved in estimating or measuring abatement is not always feasible. So it is about weighing up the various impacts of a particular measure.