Peter Khalil can’t say whether the government has a plan to phase out fossil fuels. He’s also silent on taxing big polluters and removing fossil fuel subsidies.

A group of constituents met with Peter Khalil on Monday 18^th May and presented 99 letters from locals calling for:

• No more fossil fuel approvals and a deadline to end fossil fuels
• An end to fossil fuel subsidies
• Increased taxes on big climate polluters to pay for the harm they cause
• Action on issues of concern to them, including a safe future for their children and grandchildren.

We referred to a previous meeting in December, when Peter Khalil agreed with us that a holistic strategy to phase out fossil fuels would be positive and promised to follow up with Chris Bowen, minister for climate and energy.

At this meeting, however, he could not give us any further information and suggested we “ask Bowen” ourselves.

We pointed out that we’d already done that.

A staff member in Peter Khalil’s own office put a query to the minister for us in April and received a confusing reply about Australia “not taking sides”. We sent an email to the minister asking for clarification and received no reply.

Similarly, we got no response from Peter Khalil on ending fossil fuel subsidies and taxing big polluters to pay for the harm they cause.  He talked about his efforts as assistant minister for defence, to improve sustainability in that area – which we welcomed – but he did not respond to the concerns of his constituents.

We told him that Merri-Bek Council, like many other councils, is interested in the idea of making polluters pay for the harm they cause – since councils often have to pay for the costs of climate change – but still got no response.

Within the limited time of the meeting, we also tried to raise concerns about:

• The proposed timber fibre strategy (a dangerous proposal for our native forests that may soon become part of ALP policy – see the joint letter explaining it here)
• The new standards under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, which seem weak and ineffective
• The miniscule funding available to environment protection in the budget

These questions were not really addressed.

We will write to Peter Khalil and follow up these issues, plus others raised by constituents, such as the recent approvals of gas exploration off the Victorian coast (which are clearly not compatible with phasing out fossil fuels) and what is happening with federal funding for local transport upgrades.

Peter Khalil is an MP in a marginal electorate and should have some leverage in the Labor caucus and government, but he seems unwilling to follow up issues that are important to his constituents.

It is disappointing that our local federal MP tells us to go and ask someone else, rather than responding openly and transparently to the concerns of constituents.