Page 3289 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 21 August 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
MR RATTENBURY: Mrs Jones just interjected across the room as I made those remarks, but she was on her feet today at the end of question time complaining that somebody had misinterpreted her remarks. Yet she just stood up and gave us an outstanding exposition of what, in her case, was clearly, given the patronising tone in which her remarks were delivered, a wilful misrepresentation of Ms Le Couteur’s comments. Either that or she did not actually listen and she had pre-prepared her comments, based on assumptions of what she thought she was going to hear.
Mrs Jones interjecting—
MR RATTENBURY: I cannot hear the rest of her interjections but I have got more to observe on Mrs Jones and will come back to that.
As I was saying, Ms Le Couteur did not suggest that we all need to become vegetarian or vegan, but what the science tells us is that if we all choose a more sustainable diet—for example, by choosing to eat less meat perhaps just a few times a week—we could make a difference. This is another behavioural change issue that certainly will not happen overnight, but it is something we can take steps towards. Just as we cannot change our system so that people can all stop driving their fossil-fuel powered vehicles overnight, people choosing not to drive perhaps one day a week can make a difference to our emissions. So too if people choose to have one meat-free meal each week, this will start making a difference.
As Professor Mark Howden of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said:
We ignore the interactions between climate change and the land at our peril.
This does not need to be a difficult task, but the Greens believe that this is one step on a journey that we can support people with. Ms Le Couteur’s motion went through a range of practical steps that a government could take in order to better support our community to be more sustainable.
I think it is worth observing that Ms Le Couteur’s measures were, as I say, very practical. They come from a place that is backed up with science, because we in the Greens prefer science rather than just making things up. And that is what we have heard a bit of today. I heard some most extraordinary observations in this discussion and I think that it reflects poorly on those that bring those sorts of observations to the table when they have got no scientific backing to actually justify their statements.
In Minister Gentleman’s comments he talked a lot about prescribing what people should do. Ms Le Couteur was very clear in her remarks. She did not seek to prescribe anything. She sought to ensure the availability of options. She gave an example of attending public events where, as a vegan, when the platters come around and all the vegan options have been eaten by people who are not vegan, those options have been removed. What we are prescribing there in fact is that vegans will go home on an empty stomach. What Ms Le Couteur sought was to ensure more availability of these things, given the predilection of many people to actually eat them. This is not an unreasonable request. This is about acknowledging the variety of requirements that are out there for people.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video