Katter’s Australian’s answer: いいえ。現在の政府は企業に規制をかけすぎているNo carbon tax. No emissions trading scheme – both would involve a cost imposition upon electricity users, and virtually every person in every walk of life. It would tend to render all our export industries non-competitive. Carbon and pollutant reduction to be achieved by renewables – solar/biomass and other government initiatives and incentives (refer to ethanol).Source
Liberal Democrat’s answer: いいえ、新エネルギー生産の優遇をもっとするべきScientific evidence suggests that the Earth’s climate has changed throughout its existence, sometimes dramatically, and that changes in climate have impacted human civilisation. Should the evidence become compelling that global warming is due to human activity, that such global warming is likely to have significantly negative consequences for human existence, and that changes in human activity could realistically reverse those consequences, the LDP would favour market-based options.Source
Liberal Democrat’s answer: はいForeign investment does not disrupt either markets or trade. For those who would like to sell their properties and have some money left over after paying off the banks, or who want to borrow against their property, it is to be especially welcomed. More buyers mean higher prices.Source
Liberal Democrat’s answer: はい、しかし、環境規制や監督を高めますDavid Leyonhjelm voted very strongly against landholders' right to say no to mining and gas exploration
The majority voted against a motion moved by Senator Penny Wright related to coal seam gas. The motion was:
That the Senate—
(a) notes the importance of protecting valuable agricultural, residential and conservation land from unconventional gas activities;
(b) supports the right of landholders and local residents to say 'no' to unconventional gas exploration and mining in their communities;
(c) recognises the concerns expressed by communities in the south east of South Australia over potential groundwater contamination from unconventional gas activities; and
(d) congratulates the South East Local Government Association in South Australia for standing up for their local communities and voting for a moratorium on unconventional gas.Source
Liberal Democrat’s answer: はい。ただし、生産者に種の特許取得を許可すべきではない遺伝子組み換え作物は農薬やより高い収率の使用削減など、環境のために多くの利点を提供します。将来的には、GM作物は、食品の品質を向上させます干ばつ条件で繁栄や、塩分濃度などの環境被害を軽減します。Source
Katter’s Australian’s answer: はいKatter's Australian Party supports a uranium mining export industry because of its economic potential, the associated development of regional Queensland and for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions it would provide. Other parties may adopt a different position. Queenslanders deserve to know what these positions are.
Source
Liberal Democrat’s answer: はいWith demand for nuclear fuel set to increase in coming years, the LDP believes Australia cannot afford to neglect this important source of foreign revenue. There has been a reluctance to capitalise on this valuable resource in the past, with compromises such as the three mines policy operating during the 1980s. The LDP would remove current restrictions on the nuclear industry in Australia - allowing uranium exploration and exports with no limit on mine numbers. The only limitation it would place on uranium exports is to take reasonable steps to ensure it was not used in the production of nuclear weapons.Source
Liberal Democrat’s answer: 環境へのリスクはありませんはい、しかし、場合にのみ、The nuclear industry also has the potential to create a secondary industry based on the storage of waste products. With vast expanses of uninhabited, geologically stable land, Western Australia, South Australia and the Northern Territory could become world leaders in the field of safe storage of nuclear waste. The storage of nuclear waste, if done properly, is safe. Moreover, storage in Australia would help keep it from ending up in the wrong hands.Source
