Peta Murphy (Dunkley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I'm pleased to be able to speak on this Recycling and Waste Reduction Bill today, because in my community, like, I am sure, other communities across this country, our young people are light years ahead of government in their concern about and their local action to protect the environment and the planet. Every single high school in my electorate of Dunkley—every single high school—has amazing young people who are in clubs like the Environmental Club, where they are working to make their schools single-use-plastic free and to encourage recycling within their school environment. Frankston High School, Elisabeth Murdoch College—the young people there have come to me time and time again to say, 'This is what we're doing where we live and where we go to school. Can we have a federal government that does this on a national scale?' And, whilst this bill is better than nothing, and it's one that Labor will support, it has to be said that this federal government is still lagging behind the people that it's supposed to represent, particularly the people whose future it's supposed to be protecting when it comes to matters of environment and climate change.

When this bill was being debated last week, I was in the chamber and I heard a member of the government say that climate change should be a matter of science and not a matter of politics. Once I'd picked my jaw up off the ground after hearing that said by someone opposite, I of course agreed. I wondered why he was going to the effort of saying this, and then I realised that, in the pushing-18 months that I've been privileged enough to be in this parliament, I have not seen a speakers list for a piece of legislation that had so many members from the government benches on it as this one.

Often—and this is something the public don't really get to see—the government puts forward legislation that, outside of this place, it trumpets as essential and important reform, but in the chamber the only people who speak on it, apart from the minister introducing the bill, are members of the opposition or the crossbench. I'm not sure what those on that side of the chamber are doing, but they don't seem to come in to speak on their own legislation. But, lo and behold, we have a long list of government members speaking on this bill. The conclusion I've reached is that they're speaking on this bill so that they can go home to their electorates and say to their high schools, to their young people, 'Of course we're doing something about the environment. Of course we're doing something about climate change. Look at what I said in the chamber. Look at this speech I gave where I said climate change was a matter of science.' If only that rhetoric were matched by real action. I know that the young people in my electorate aren't fooled by announcements that aren't followed by delivery, because they are switched on, and they care and they are worried about the future.

Last week, when I thought I was speaking on this bill on Wednesday or Thursday, I put a post on my Facebook page for my electorate saying, 'I'm waiting to get on to speak about recycling and the environment. Anyone have any suggestions they would like me to raise?' And, because I have an amazing electorate, there were a lot of things that were raised. Incentives or tax offsets for small businesses that can demonstrate a percentage of waste reduction or a percentage increase in sustainable products and practices—that's a great idea. Melissa says, 'We need all levels of government investing and supporting businesses to improve waste, to have cost-effective, sustainable packaging and composting options.' Composting options are cost prohibitive at the moment, but there's more that can happen in this space. That's a role for government. It's a role that this government hasn't taken up.

Government owned or subsidised recycling plants are a must. I got a comment on my Facebook page from someone I know who is not usually a fan of government-run industries but can see the need for government support in this area, because recycling is cost prohibitive for many in private enterprise—so bring the industry back for government to run was a suggestion that was made. I am going to read this comment in full as it really reflects the sentiment I hear over and over again from across the electorate of Dunkley. They said: 'We need to move away from single-use plastic. When single-use plastics break down into microplastics they infiltrate all components of the natural world and of course humans. Research is starting to show that this microplastic is being ingested by humans at an alarming rate—a credit-cards worth of plastic a week, humans are ingesting. Why? Because it is in the atmosphere and it's being absorbed by plants and been ingested by the animals that we then eat, and has been found in water that all research has so far touched. Studies are also indicating that it is a contributor to global warming through the process of its breakdown in the environment.' This constituent of mine suggests that I ask Scotty to go and do some homework and get back to me.'

See this speech in context