Page 1865 - Week 05 - Thursday, 16 May 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
This amendment calls on the Greens to practise what they preach. Rather than just say there is a climate emergency but still go around the world travelling on recreational pursuits which use huge amounts of aviation fuel—about four tonnes of carbon emissions for every business class return journey to Singapore that Mr Rattenbury takes—how about he actually practise what he preaches and abstain from all air travel?
There are two Greens here. One of those Greens, I know, actually does have a principled position against air travel. One does not. It is all very well to come in here and lecture us but you have actually got to practise what you preach. You cannot go travelling the world, going to running festivals, and then claim that people should be pulling their weight. There is hypocrisy here. If they are fair dinkum they will abstain from all air travel and they will undertake all their international and interstate meetings via phone and videoconferencing. If it is a climate emergency, how can you possibly justify flying around the world for a holiday? I just do not understand it. I see Ms Le Couteur is nodding. How can you justify it?
You can say, “We will offset it.” How about doing the offset and not flying? That is the best outcome. If we are going to be serious about this debate and we are going to be virtue signallers, let us actually have a bit of principle in what we say here. The test for the Greens is whether they support this amendment. I imagine one of them will be quite inclined to but I am not sure about the other.
MR RATTENBURY (Kurrajong) (4.39): I put this motion up today because it is a very serious issue. I had hoped that we could actually have a proper and serious discussion about climate change and that the Liberal Party would take one of those climate motions seriously for once and not just dismiss it or resort to the snide and churlish remarks that we have heard in this place before when it comes to these kinds of issues. But unfortunately my optimism has proven to be misguided.
When my colleague Ms Le Couteur raised a matter of public importance on climate change in April the Liberal environment spokesperson, Ms Lee, made a speech belittling the idea and making a range of statements that echoed the language of climate change sceptics. She said
… too much discussion on climate is based on fiction or misplaced ideology …
She said:
… climate is changing—it always has …
She said:
The panic and alarmist policies of groups like the Greens to stop all coalmining now and shut down all coal-fired power stations immediately, to remove all fuelled cars and trucks … is a plan for economic ruin …
I encourage Ms Lee to have a look at the front page of today’s Sydney Morning Herald, where Professor Ross Garnaut highlights the enormous economic opportunity
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video