Greg Hunt (Flinders, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Climate Change, Environment and Water) Share this | Hansard source

Let me begin by apologising for giving the member for Dawson a platform to run on: a campaign against the new uranium mine which Peter Garrett recently approved. I believe it is a great example of cognitive dissonance, and I will explain that term to him afterwards, but I apologise for giving him a platform to take flight of fancy.

I want to make three statements in relation to the Australian Centre for Renewable Energy Bill 2009. This bill does something which we think is reasonable, fair and appropriate. It builds on that which we put in place in government, but it comes in the context of a government which has waged an effective assault on renewable energy. The government has waged that assault in three ways: firstly, by seeking to delay, defer and deny the renewable energy target by making it hostage to legislation at the time which would have prevented it from being passed and would have prevented the early implementation of the renewable energy target. We stood for and promoted the 20 per cent renewable energy target for Australia by 2020. We stood by the notion of expanding the great opportunities for the visionary energy sources of the future—whether it is biogas, Mr Deputy Speaker Schultz, in your own electorate through the use of landfill at the Tarago plant; whether it is wind or solar or geothermal or hydro or wave or tidal. These are all energy sources of the future. They will not provide all of Australia’s energy, but they will be a critical part of the transition to a clean energy future along with clean coal—whether it is through sequestration or algal work—gas or other forms of clean energy as we proceed forward.

But we do know this: we clearly offered to pass legislation associated with the renewable energy target. We offered to bring it forward and deal with it, but the government sought to politicise it and make it hostage to other legislation. So we fought for a deal which would have separated that legislation, we fought for a deal which would ensure that our heavy extracting industries would not pay a disproportionate cost and we fought for a deal which would ensure that we cleaned up and used the waste coalmine gas which would otherwise have been vented as methane or flared as CO2—and we were successful in all of those three great tasks. We were thereby able to achieve a renewable energy target of 20 per cent, or 60,000 gigawatt hours of Australia’s potential 300,000 gigawatt hours of energy, by 2020. It is a good thing and a positive thing, but it stands squarely in the face of a government who on the one hand talked about renewables but on the other did everything they could to see us knock down or block their legislation. But we would not accept that; we held them to account. We argued the moral case and the practical case. We won in the eyes of the public; we won over the public imagination. They accepted our proposals and our vision and therefore the government backed down, buckled and agreed to what we said. That was a good result.

The second area in which this legislation before us is undermined is in relation to the government’s activity on decentralised solar programs. We have seen an attack on solar energy on three different fronts. Firstly, with the solar homes program, the government all of a sudden, overnight, caused chaos in the industry a year ago when on budget night 2008 they means tested the program in direct defiance of an express, clear and absolute election promise. This was a breach of a promise. It was a breach of that which was solemnly taken to the Australian people. Instead of dealing with the program in a different way, what we saw was an express, clear, absolute breach of promise. We then saw the entire solar homes program abolished in June this year—unilaterally—with no notice whatsoever. That same day the program was terminated. Again there was chaos. We had solar operators calling our offices. We had build-ups of solar equipment which was left to fester as overdone inventories. These were real problems created by the government and experienced by solar operators—people whose jobs were put on the line, who had relied upon the good faith of the government, whose hopes were dashed and who suffered financially. It was everything but the successful, sensible management of a program.

We have also seen under the solar programs that the remote solar program for assisting Indigenous communities was itself also abolished with no notice. An email was issued at 8.33 one morning in late June. That email was effective as of 8.30 am that same day. Solar programs were ceased for remote Indigenous communities as of that moment. For some businesses this was catastrophic. It went to the heart of their business model, their mission and their purpose. I have dealt with Bushlight from Alice Springs. It has been seriously affected. This was a not-for-profit project and a not-for-profit organisation with an aim to provide clean, reliable solar energy to remote Indigenous and other communities—and the program was stopped dead at that moment. It was an act of incompetence and an act of effective malice against people in Indigenous and other remote communities.

The third of the solar programs which was affected was the Solar Schools Program. Again, it was stopped dead in its tracks overnight just a couple of months ago. We have seen the solar homes program abolished, the remote solar program abolished and the Solar Schools Program abolished. Why? Because they were all deemed to be too successful. We have been in the process of spending billions and billions, through the emissions trading scheme, whilst axing practical solar programs which actually make a difference on the ground in terms of emissions reduction and energy consumption. That is the dissonance within the government’s approach.

That brings me to one of the programs directly under the Australian Centre for Renewable Energy, and that is the Solar Flagships Program. The Solar Flagships Program was a hoax, a fraud, a fix and a set-up. It is in chaos. Let me put it this way: there was an express promise made by the Prime Minister that he would create a 1,000-megawatt power station for $1.6 billion. Yet we know that that project is likely to cost not $1.6 billion but $4.8 billion. It has now been scaled back to less than 40 per cent of its size. It is likely to be still lesser in size. That is a clear broken promise, a clear failure of administration and a clear inability to manage public funds for proper benefit.

We have seen a failure of solar programs, firstly through the renewable energy target and the way in which the government prevented its own program; secondly, through the abolition of the solar homes, remote solar and solar schools programs; and, thirdly, through the catastrophic mismanagement of the Solar Flagships Program. There is a pattern here of promising the earth and delivering a vastly different outcome. Each of these programs stands for that principle. We know that the government was warned about the design elements of the renewable energy target. The government was warned of the problems. We were not going to stand in its way, but the government was warned and that is now in chaos. Renewable energy is in chaos. The solar homes, solar schools and remote solar programs are in chaos and now so is solar flagships.

Let me make this point: what was a well-managed program prior to the transition of governments has now become chaotic. That is why there is in fact a need for a Centre for Renewable Energy, which may bring some semblance of order to the way in which the government manages its renewable energy programs. It is desperately needed. Each of these three programs, the renewable energy target, solar programs in general and Solar Flagships Program in particular, is in chaos. This bill is needed to add a semblance of order, a semblance of structure, a semblance of progress to what is otherwise a good idea of clean energy for Australia—solar energy for Australia; wave, geothermal, tidal and landfill biogas for Australia. That is the vision we believe in. That is what we were delivering. I hope that this bill will enable some progress and will allow the government to resolve that which it has undone and that which it has allowed to be brought into chaos.

See this speech in context