I love it when the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction talks about numbers, because the truth is the numbers he usually relies on are in fraudulent documents, like those relating to the City of Sydney. They're the only documents that he's genuinely interested in, and they're the only numbers that he relies on. But let's talk about a couple of numbers from the government's own documents. Their emissions projections reports show that, when Labor was last in government, we cut annual carbon emissions by 87.5 million tonnes. Off the minister goes, because he's afraid he'll actually learn something. I don't think he reads the government's own documents. He's too busy having his office make up other ones. Under Labor, 87.5 million tonnes of emissions, on an annual basis, were cut from our greenhouse gas emissions. Under this government, from 2014 to 2019, it was 22 million tonnes—less than a third of what Labor achieved.
How did they achieve those emissions reductions? This is from their own reports. Principally, it was from the renewable energy target, from Labor's RET, which they tried to abolish three times. Now they're claiming credit for it, such is the chutzpah of this organisation. Secondly, they shut down car manufacturing—that's the second reason emissions fell between 2014 and 2019. Thirdly, it was because of the drought. So the three causes of emissions falling between 2014 and 2019 are Labor's RET, killing the car industry, and the drought. I wouldn't be bragging about that if I were the minister.
The truth is that they did achieve emissions reductions last year. A massive 26 million tonnes was cut from emissions last year. Do you know how they did it? It was by the Morrison recession. If you shrink the economy by 6½ per cent, which is what they did, you cut emissions by 26 million tonnes. A recession led to that.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Llew O'Brien): The member for Petrie on a point of order?
Mr CONROY: What?
Mr Howarth: First of all, there's parliamentary language, but I would ask that the member opposite refer to the Prime Minister by his correct title.
Mr CONROY: I did refer to the Prime Minister.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: I'll deal with the point of order first.
Mr Conroy interjecting—
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: You can go to the point of order, but I think I know what you're going to say and I'm going to address it.
Mr Howarth interjecting—
Mr CONROY: I didn't refer to the Prime Minister. I referred to an economic recession.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I'm going to rule on this. I watch very closely the use of the proper titles of members. The member for Shortland was not referring directly to the Prime Minister. Regularly 'the Morrison government' is used by the government itself, so I'm ruling this in order. But I would also caution those on my left to be mindful of the way they use titles.
Mr CONROY: Thank you, Deputy Speaker. What a moronic intervention from the member opposite.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member for Shortland will withdraw.
Mr CONROY: I'm not referring to the member.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER: The member will withdraw.
Mr CONROY: I withdraw, but this is the quality we have opposite. No wonder climate policy is so substandard under this government. Those opposite don't even understand the standing orders of this place, let alone climate policy. He's still denying it. This guy is so hopeless. He is so obsessed with his minor debating point; he can't even understand the Deputy Speaker's rulings. No wonder this government is hopeless. No wonder the only way it can cut emissions is by reducing the size of the economy. That is the truth of this. This is in the government's own document. And the sad truth is that, even with claiming credit for the drought, Labor's RET, killing the auto industry, and the Morrison recession, they still don't hit their 2030 target.
In 2030, according to their figures, Australia's emissions will only be 478 million tonnes, still 35 million tonnes above their own target. The government's own papers admit they have failed, and it's because they're divided into two groups. There are the fossils, who deny the science of climate change—like the member for New England—and there are the bedwetters, who can't stand to them, who can't take action and who are denying the economic opportunities for the future of Australia. They are denying the future. They are destroying the future for the next generation, and they will stand condemned in history.