Zali Steggall has the question call:

Young people around the world want a say in the world the environment they will inherit, the ICJ has confirmed nations have a legal obligation to prevent climate harm and productivity and economy has been battered by success of climate fuelled events, despite this the government ‘s defining action so far as to recklessly accelerate warming by approving new gas extraction to 2070, this negates any other policy, minimum target of 75 by 35 of methane abatement is urgently needed, will you be ambitious?

Chris Bowen:

I thank the Honourable Member for question. And her position is very well-established in the crossbench have been strong with their views, and this Government we set our targets following a very rigourous process which is outlined by the Climate Change Act, to be fair, which members on the crossbench voted for, the act outlines the worlds best practice for setting a target, the government receives a price from the Climate Change Authority considers the economic impact and the science and how that target might be achieved, then announces the target.

We are together with the UK they are taking a very similar approach, the target the government sets will be two things – it will be importantly achievable, I say to honourable members as I have said elsewhere is very important a target be able to be achieved, it is not a useful contribution to the debate to set a target without outlining how the country can actually achieve that target.

Yes, ambition is very important but so is achievability, both those will be reflected in the target the government announces following the receipt of the Climate Change Authority advice we have not yet received and we will follow the rigourous process is outlined in the Climate Change Act.

Ooohhhhh that sound you hear is Grog’s fingers pounding the keyboard as he furiously types out a response to that guff.