In a contentious Question Time exchange with Pauline Hanson, Penny Wong was unable to describe “net zero” at this uncomfortable point.
Would the minister kindly explain to the Australian people and me what “net-zero emissions” truly means, in layman’s terms? questioned Senator Hanson, who opposes Australia’s net zero emissions by 2050 aim.
Senator Wong, the foreign affairs minister who also responds to questions on climate change in the senate, was unable to provide a concise definition and was forced to ramble.
I don’t know how to describe it other than to state that it signifies net zero. I see the senator’s point; it’s just one of those things.
“I will consider whether I can provide a clarification that is more illuminating than that, but to me, the terms “net zero” are fairly apparent.
‘I believe we all understand what ”net emissions” implies.’
She said, “I believe it’s a well acknowledged aim, and I thought, as the senator knows, that it’s an objective that is held by those opposite.”
Australia will have net zero carbon emissions by 2050, which means it will take as much carbon out of the atmosphere as it puts in.
Burning fossil fuels releases carbon, which plants and trees extract via photosynthesis.
Senator Wong’s rambling response left One Nation leader Senator Hanson “gobsmacked,” she added.
You don’t understand what net zero is, she said.
The conflict occurred the day before the Senate was scheduled to vote on the climate change bill, which sets the Labor government’s goal to cut emissions by 43% from 2005 levels by 2030.
On Thursday afternoon, the House of Representatives is expected to vote on sending the amended bill back.