The UK's Committee is advisory, and the Secretary of State is obliged to consult them and "obtain and take into account" their views before changing the country's emissions target. This bill creates a climate change czar with wide-ranging powers to dictate government policy and does not allow the Minister to "vary the target unless … the Commission recommends the proposed variation" making the Parliament beholden to an unelected body. It also requires that policy adjust on the actions of others through the United Nations. That's a subversion of our democracy and sovereignty. It's also arguably unconstitutional for subjugating the Parliament. A new bureaucracy would also duplicate activities of the States, leading to confused responsibilities and wasting resources on bureaucrats that could be targeted to emissions cuts. It's also argued the bill is needed to achieve a net zero target for 2050. That's false. The Climate Change Authority is already advising the government on targets with "enhanced ambition that put Australia on a path to net-zero emissions" consistent with existing policy.

As the Prime Minister said recently some "will go out and make a glib promise about [net-zero targets] and they can't look Australians in the eye and tell them what it will mean for their electricity prices, what it will mean for their jobs". That's why the government is reviewing strategies to assess the impact of a revised target to take to the Glasgow climate conference later this year. Unlike Labor that can promise a headline target but not how they'll meet it, the government is mapping out a technology pathway to confront Australians with the choices that are before us. It's also argued the commission is necessary to establish a monitoring and reporting framework for emissions cuts. Again: false. That's what the Clean Energy Regulator does. This bill is just politics. For weeks its sponsor has run email campaigns demanding MPs vote for a bill before providing a copy. Now we know why. The bill can't withstand scrutiny.

The campaign for the bill is also anchored around the idea that "climate is a matter of conscience". That's policy-by-hashtag. Action on climate change is about responsibility. At the last election parliamentarians were elected on different platforms to cut emissions. Parliamentarians are accountable to Australians, not unelected bureaucrats. Cutting emissions is one of the most serious economic and environmental challenges and opportunities we all collectively face. Trust is critical to achieve sustainable emissions reduction with the support of the Australian people. What you do before an election is what you should honour after. Just ask Julia Gillard. The foundation of liberalism is that citizens, communities and countries should accept responsibility.

Just like littering, individually we cannot stop needless pollution, but we should encourage everyone to take responsibility to steward our environment. Loading Australia is only 1.3 per cent of global emissions. We cannot stop the consequences of human influence on the climate in isolation. Even with Australia's emissions at zero we will be wholly exposed to a changing climate. The false argument some put forward is our low emissions are an excuse to do nothing. That's absurd. Emissions cuts and our target should be used to leverage other countries to voluntarily make commitments and revise them as they're met too.

Loading That principle is at the heart of Australia's target to cut emissions by 26 to 28 per cent of 2005 levels by 2030. Australia's is high comparable to other countries on both national and per capita terms. Critically, these targets were endorsed by the Australian people at the last election. A solution cannot be one-size-fits-all. Australia is traditionally a fossil-fuel dependent economy and faces a considerable challenge in transitioning our electricity and transport sectors, our agriculture and mining exports and royalties. Our plan is anchored around cutting emissions, not jobs. The $3.5 billion Climate Solutions Package is a sector-by-sector plan that can "evolve" as emissions are cut. For example, the Commonwealth invested $960 million with the NSW government for a Renewable Energy Zone to provide up to 3000 megawatts of wind and solar projects. That's in addition to investments in hydrogen power, the Snowy Hydro 2.0 battery of the nation project and hundreds of local projects across Australia by governments and the private sector. It's a strategy for emissions cuts through technology, not taxes.