Ian Macfarlane (Groom, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Energy and Resources) Share this | Hansard source

There are all sorts of acronyms we could be using. The review will also look at whether they should also accommodate the expanded renewable energy targets. This review is probably appropriate, providing it is not done on a political basis. I guess that is where our concerns rest: that in fact it may be just another review. We have seen this government set up a review through a House standing committee to look at the CPRS and then get such a fright that it might in fact say things that it does not want said that it killed off the review. The government established a review and then killed it off. In my time in parliament I do not ever recall a government killing off a review that it had established. What information was going to come out of that review that the Prime Minister, the Treasurer and the Minister for Climate Change and Water did not want made public? What was going to come out of that review? So has this review being done by the ministerial council been sanitised as well? Is it going to do a true inquiry into the energy market impacts of the CPRS and RET, or is it going to be another review which this government either chokes or manipulates to get the right outcome?

This government is creating problems with both the CPRS and its renewable energy policy—and not only in the manufacturing sector, which I could speak for hours on having been the minister for industry and knowing the impact that the CPRS is going to have on jobs in Australia, knowing how difficult it is for industry in Australia to be competitive and knowing the disadvantages we already have. Energy intensive and/or trade exposed industries cover pretty much every industry in Australia. Anyone who makes something is competing against other exports when they go into the international market or other imports in their domestic market. I know how difficult it is, and the CPRS is simply going to make that job more difficult for industry and cost jobs here in Australia. We know that, and the Senate inquiry into this matter will no doubt reveal it further. We also know that if we do not set sustainable renewable energy targets, we will not only increase the price of energy so much that, again, it will cost jobs in industry but also have situations like we had during the heatwaves in South Australia this year, where the renewable energy sector provided a certain percentage of the energy requirement. As everyone knows, on a hot day in Adelaide, the wind is not blowing—and, when the wind stops blowing, that means there is no electricity from the wind turbines.

We support renewable energy. We have done more than this government has done on renewable energy. We are the ones who spent all the money. We are the ones who went out with dollars to get renewable energy projects up. While this government talks about it, we did it. But it needs to be done in a balanced and responsible way so that it ensures that the energy supply market is sustainable and that industry is not left with an unfair burden.

I say in conclusion that this is one of the last bricks in the wall. The AEMO legislation is not the final chapter but is certainly one of the concluding chapters in a story which at some stages I thought would never be written. I remember being thrust into the first meeting as minister and coming out and saying to the then Deputy Secretary of DITR John Ryan, ‘What the hell is going on?’ because basically everyone just wanted to fight about energy market reform. The Commonwealth had a vision and the states were supposedly signed up to it but there was no way that state treasuries in particular were going to let go of it.

Seven years on, the process which, as I said, was identified by the IEA as the world leader in energy market reform is approaching a conclusion. It is something that we in opposition support and it is something we worked hard on in government. I congratulate the minister for his legislation. I look forward to his ongoing commitment. I hope the Prime Minister has the courage to support him.

See this speech in context