Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for the Murray Darling Basin) Share this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Xenophon for co-sponsoring this amendment with the opposition and for his work on this topic with us and with the industry affected. I also thank Senator Milne for her comments just then and for her indication that this is an area of genuine need for consideration when looking at the bill and, in particular, for reserving her position on these amendments, depending upon where discussions have gone between the government, the affected industry sector and companies and upon what solution the government has for this matter. I will not make a lengthy contri­bution now, noting that the debate will conclude at two o'clock, and I am eager to hear from the minister as to whether there has been some progress. I would just highlight that in the committee report of the inquiry into this the No. 1 recommendation was:

... the government consider options to ensure there are no perverse incentives to cease existing abatement projects, and encourage first movers to undertake further abatement or sequestration activities under the Carbon Farming Initiative.

In the response to that Senate committee inquiry tabled the other day by the govern­ment, they did indicate support for that recommendation. They did indicate that they thought there should not be perverse incen­tives to cease existing abatement projects.

As Senator Xenophon has highlighted, there are a number of projects that could be at risk were the bill to pass without amend­ment and without addressing this issue. We think that would be totally unacceptable. These are companies that have invested in good faith. These are companies that have done the right thing by the environment by capturing the gases from landfill projects and ensuring that they are used to generate electricity, and it would be an utter waste if those systems were not encouraged into the future. There are many localities—regional centres such as Bendigo, Ballarat, Tweed Shire, Launceston and Newcastle—that would potentially be most vulnerable in this regard. Some of those regional centres would be the ones most likely to see the perverse outcome where, if we pass this, in fact we will end up with less rather than more abate­ment, and that obviously is not an outcome that would be at all acceptable under this scheme.

There are some other points that I would like to and probably will highlight when we return to this debate but, to make sure that the minister can at least update Senator Milne and the chamber on discussions with proponents to now, I will leave enough time for him.