Page 3909 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 25 September 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
In the meantime, for households who wish to save money and who are in a position to do so because either an appliance has reached the end of its life or they wish to make that switch as they move to a new property, for example, it is possible to make that transition towards higher efficiency electric appliances. That obviously helps achieve the broader goal of emissions reduction, but it does not mean we are turning off the gas network tomorrow. That alarmism does no-one any credit.
If we are to reach our mid-century goals there must be a multi-decade transition. That is a relatively gentle pace of transition. There will be no compulsion; encouragement and market forces will play a very significant part in this transition in terms of energy sources for heating, cooking and cooling as well as for private transport.
I reiterate the point that most of the world’s major vehicle manufacturers will no longer be producing internal combustion engine vehicles in the 2030s. There will be within our city’s car fleet, for the foreseeable future, vehicles that are powered by diesel, petrol or compressed natural gas. Those vehicles will eventually reach the end of their life and will be replaced by vehicles that produce zero emissions. They will predominantly be electric vehicles, but I suspect that with the pace of change around the hydrogen industry—it is supported at the federal level as well, and Australia has the capacity to be a significant hydrogen energy exporter—that will also be a fuel source for our domestic market.
I think the future is quite bright as it relates to this transition. It can be done in a way that brings everyone along on that journey. There is no need for populist alarmism. The language and characterisation that some have been using already in this debate poorly reflects on them. In the end they will be found out, because you can only peddle misinformation for so long. People are smart, they ask good questions and they will see through a pitiful scare campaign.
I commend Mr Gupta for this motion today. It is a good opportunity to rebut a few of the silly things that have been bandied about by those opposite, who will have more opportunity in future motions, I am sure.
MRS KIKKERT (Ginninderra) (5.56): I am grateful to have a few moments to address Mr Gupta’s motion. I congratulation Mr Gupta on drafting a motion that is guaranteed to be not just enthusiastically received and supported but also fully implemented. After all, calling on the Barr government to spend Canberra ratepayers’ money to actively promote its own agenda is a bit like calling on the sun to rise tomorrow—everyone in this chamber knows it is going to happen whether Mr Gupta asks for it or not.
A striking example of this government comprehensively promoting its own agenda can be seen in what happened in Canberra’s public schools last week. Following the passage of a motion jointly moved by Mr Rattenbury and Ms Berry on 22 August, the Minister for Education and Early Childhood Development ordered Barr government schools not to penalise any student who skipped class in order to attend Friday’s staged protest.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video