REGULATIONS AND DETERMINATIONS

Mr BOWEN (McMahon—Minister for Climate Change and Energy) (15:33): Today, both houses of parliament have an opportunity to back practical climate action. Today, both houses of parliament have an opportunity to strengthen the protection of native forests and koalas. Today, both houses of parliament have an opportunity to back economic activity in regional Australia.

It's time for people in both houses to back practical action which backs the regions and to vote down the coalition's move to disallow the native forest management method. Voting this down will be a win for New South Wales communities in particular, because the establishment of the Great Koala National Park is expected to generate, with this scheme, $200 million in regional economic activity.

We think that's a good thing. It's also going to protect 12,000 koalas, 36,000 gliders and the habitat of more than a hundred threatened species. We think that's a good thing.

It's pretty hard for the member for Wannon to surprise me these days, because I thought I'd heard it all. I know that he's an extremist. I know that the member for Wannon is run by the IPA and ADVANCE and he's after the 'Sky after dark' vote and he's taking the Liberal Party further right on climate than it's ever been before, which is a big call—hard to do.

But I've got to admit I was surprised—gobsmacked, in fact—to hear the member for Wannon say, 'National parks—what do they deliver? Noxious weeds and feral animals.' National parks are a great Australian institution that have had bipartisan support, to be fair. Governments of both persuasions, and federal and state, have built a great estate of national parks through our country that we can be proud of, that people from around the world come to visit and that families visit on a daily basis.

They protect our beautiful natural and vital resources. And what does the member for Wannon say about national parks in Australia? 'Noxious weeds and feral animals—terrible things, our national parks.' I've heard it all now. You can only go so far right.

I know that you take your marching orders from the Institute of Public Affairs and ADVANCE and you're after that 'Sky after dark' vote. You're fighting with One Nation over that. But, really, we've heard it all now.

The improved native forest management method is a simple premise. It gives states a way to earn income from carbon credits, if they reduce logging, that they can then invest in those communities and help the workers. It's a voluntary method.

States aren't obliged to use it. Some states will; some states won't. New South Wales clearly will.

The voluntary method gives states sensible options and gives communities access to economic diversity. A state government can elect to reduce its logging in certain forests in exchange for earning carbon credits, ensuring fewer trees are cut down, there's greater habitat protection for Australian wildlife, and local economies remain supported. This method was initiated by the New South Wales government.

The member for Wannon thought that was a revelation. It's all on the public record. It's part of the process.

The New South Wales government did instigate this. It was independently assessed by the Emissions Reduction Assurance Committee as meeting the legislated offset integrity standards. It'll deliver emissions reductions and improve environmental conditions and biodiversity by protecting native forests.

The other person involved in the establishment of this method is Professor Andrew Macintosh. I don't always agree with Professor Macintosh. He is a critic, by and large, of the offsets regime.

Here we have a person who has criticised the offsets regime more broadly, but he has specifically designed this one because he believes it has high integrity. He believes it is one which can actively support biodiversity and emissions reduction. So, if even someone who is deeply sceptical of the offsets regime thinks this is a good method, maybe it's an opportunity for members in both houses to reflect on that.

I do want to thank the leader of the Greens for her engagement on this issue and the majority of the Greens party room who will be supporting this side of the House and opposing the disallowance motion. I simply say this to every member of the House: if you're a Green or not a Green, if you believe in climate action—if you're voting on a bill or a motion in relation to climate change and you're in the Liberal Party, the National Party or One Nation, you're probably on the wrong side.

I know some Greens senators have taken a different view and have chosen to vote with the Liberals and Nationals and One Nation. I simply say this: you tried that before on the CPRS, and you set back climate action in this country by decades. That is something that the Greens party should always be ashamed of.

This is practical action, and the majority of the Greens have taken a more practical and sensible course today. On these sensible measures, the member for Fremantle and I have agreed to make some small adjustments to the process which will enable the Clean Energy Regulator to give effect to the New South Wales government's commitment to limit the sale of ACCUs generated within the Great Koala National Park to a specified class of entities.

It'll apply only to projects under this method and only where a state government chooses to opt in to those requirements. In addition, my honourable friend has written to the Emissions Reduction Assurance Committee seeking advice on variations to the method, including the amount of forest that must be protected against established harvesting baselines before projects can receive any carbon credits—rising to 30 per cent for projects registered from 1 July 2030—and clarifying the definitions of plantation forests and native forests.

The ACCU scheme is an important part of Australia's pathway to net zero. I know I run the risk of triggering members opposite by mentioning net zero, but it is an important part of it. Mr Tehan: You haven't mentioned jobs once!

Mr BOWEN: I just talked about the economic development opportunities, investment and jobs created in regional Australia. The ACCU methods can not only help drive emissions reduction; they can also create economic growth and opportunities for landholders, regional communities and businesses. The honourable member for Gippsland said we need to go out to regional Australia.

Well, I have walked Arnhem Land, and I have inspected the savanna burning method, for example, with the First Nations groups implementing that method. I have seen firsthand the economic opportunities, the growth and the jobs created for our First Nations people in Arnhem Land. A couple of weeks ago I was in Yass looking at the soil sequestration methods and the wealth created and the improvements in soil for farmers and the improvements in productivity created by these methods.

So I say to the National Party and the Liberal Party that they should get out more and they should talk to those farmers who want to take these methods up. They should talk to those groups who want to participate in these methods. We did implement the Chubb review on coming to office, which has seen enhanced integrity and expanded opportunities for regional Australia.

The Climate Change Authority's latest review of the scheme, released just last week, found it robust and that it remains fundamentally sound and important to Australia's climate policy framework. So we'll continue to take sensible and practical steps, and I thank those honourable members in this House and in the Senate who are supporting it. There once was a time when those on the conservative side of politics saw the value in conserving the environment.

I've often thought that you're not really a conservative unless you care about conserving the environment. I do want to pay tribute, however, to Senator Andrew McLachlan, who has indicated he will be voting with the government—a Liberal senator who'll be voting with the government. He has shown courage and a practical approach, and he's to be congratulated for that.

It's also the case that the Liberal Party wants you to support markets. This is a carbon market. This is a market mechanism.

We on this side of the House support the operation of the market. Those opposite oppose it. We want to see regional communities benefit from sensible climate policies.

We're focused on practical outcomes. We're focused on emissions reductions and jobs creation at the same time. I also want to thank the honourable member for Fremantle, my assistant minister, who's done such good work on this.

He's to be congratulated for this outcome, as well. I thank those members and senators who today will be voting for practical environmental protection and for economic growth and who will be voting against ideologues on the other side who don't believe in emissions reduction and want to see regional communities suffer.