Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Manufacturing) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak to the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Bill 2015. I make it clear that I support the position as outlined by the member for Port Adelaide and supported only a few moments ago by the member for Brand, who also spoke on this bill and who I know was also party to the discussions in the negotiations that ultimately led to the target that is now before us.

The Renewable Energy Target was introduced by the Howard government for a very simple purpose—that was, to reduce carbon emissions in Australia. It is one of many initiatives that have been committed to by both government and the private sector over the years in order to achieve that outcome. And the reason why we want to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in this country is because the planet is warming, our climate is changing and there is increasing global scientific consensus that the global changes that we are seeing are being contributed to mostly because of human activity in the form of creating and producing greenhouse gases, of which carbon dioxide is the major one.

There has been a number of other measures put in place over the years to try and ensure that we actually begin to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in this country and, indeed, across the world. Countries across the world are each in their own way making their contributions to changing the level of greenhouse gas emissions that have been occurring over the last hundred years or so. Each country does so in a way that best fits in with their own economy. But what we are seeing, more so in recent years than ever before, is that the major emitting countries like the USA, India, China and Europe are moving in the right direction in as much as they are making some serious efforts to reduce their carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions. Each are doing so by different mechanisms and different methods but they are all acting in a way which takes them in the same direction.

Whilst here in Australia, we see the Abbott government taking this country in the opposite direction. The major policy of direct action has been dismissed and discredited by most analysts. It is a policy that pays polluters with little net benefit to the environment or to the country for that matter. In fact, the $2 billion plus that has been allocated to that program, I believe, will be money that will give very little return to Australian taxpayers. As the member for Adelaide recently pointed out, it worked out that for each tonne of abatement that was achieved by this government in the first purchase of certificates, the cost was $600 plus per tonne. That is not good value for the Australian taxpayers.

We saw the Abbott government also try to get rid of the Australian Renewable Energy Agency and the Climate Commission, which is, I understand, now the Climate Council. But this change, the change to the Renewable Energy Target, is only the latest and perhaps the most significant of all the changes it wants to make. The Renewable Energy Target has been in place now for over a decade and it is actually working. It is actually making a difference to the release of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the Australian atmosphere.

On that point, there are many who talk about the fact that we are only a small player in the globe and therefore our contribution to whether or not there is an increase in greenhouse gas emissions makes little difference to the climate. Whether or not that is true, we have a responsibility as a country within the globe to do the best we can and the most we can to play our part in reducing those submissions, regardless of whether others are living up to expectations or not. I hear it often said by members opposite, when they talk about the current state of the Australian budget. And I heard it only earlier this evening by the Minister for the Environment, the very person who currently has responsibility for the environment in this chamber, when he referred to the intergenerational theft of the previous government by not having balanced its budget.

There is no greater intergenerational theft that I can think of than by a government that reneges on its obligation and its responsibility to manage the issue of climate change. In effect what is happening is that we are passing onto future generations a very heavy penalty for the inaction of this government. It is even worse than that, because, as a result of the inaction of today's government, we may even have effects that are totally irreversible; and future generations will never be able to share, enjoy or be part of our current way of life.

The renewable energy target is indeed working. It has created some 20,000 jobs here in Australia and I understand worldwide there are currently around 7.7 million jobs in the renewable energy sector. That is because countries are embracing the opportunities provided to them by the emerging and growing renewable energy industries. As other speakers have pointed out, the number of solar rooftop panels on houses across Australia increased from 7000 homes when we came to office to 1.2 million when we left office. I believe there has been about 200,000 in the last couple of years. We have almost one million solar hot water systems in homes around Australia as well. There are wind power solar farms, hydro plants and renewable energy technology developments right throughout this country. These have been critical in sustaining and supporting the manufacturing sector in Australia at a time when that sector has been hit hard by other policies of the Abbott government.

I have spoken to businesses in my home state of South Australia about how important the renewable energy sector is to the future of the many manufacturing businesses which faced dire consequences of the Abbott government having orchestrated the collapse of the automotive industry in this country. The member for Port Adelaide mentioned the company IXL, which I visited with him and where we saw exactly the opportunities presented by the Renewable Energy Target. IXL had made the transition from automotive component manufacturing to making the frames for large solar panels for use in the large solar projects we will see around Australia. That the firm had two projects—one it was working on and one it had put on hold because of the confusion and uncertainty surrounding the Renewable Energy Target. Dozens of jobs were in limbo as a result of the government wanting to change the Renewable Energy Target. Tindo Solar, which is another company in my electorate, made the point very clearly: it was the Renewable Energy Target that was sustaining its business of making domestic solar panels. I understand that Tindo is the only home solar panel maker in Australia and it is very supportive of the renewable energy target. Other companies interstate made it absolutely clear that, if the Renewable Energy Target was interfered with in any way, they would have to shed jobs.

I can think of only one reason that the government would want to change the current target, and that is to protect the fossil fuel companies and the electricity generators of this country that provide most of the electricity at the moment. There is no other logical reason. The argument used by members opposite—that we can achieve a 20 per cent reduction in emissions by 2020 and therefore the 43,000 gigawatt target needs to come down as well—does not stack up. If we surpass the 20 per cent target, what is the problem? What is wrong with going beyond the 20 per cent target that we have set ourselves? That, indeed, was a minimum target; there is nothing to stop us from going further and, if we do, it means that we have contributed even more than we had planned in reducing greenhouse gas emissions in this country and across the world. That is exactly what we should be doing—when we should set only minimum targets rather than targets that we cap when we reach them.

The last point I would make is this: the uncertainty that has been created by the Abbott government in wanting to change the target has clearly affected the renewable energy sector in this country. The Clean Energy Council has made statements to the effect that there is about $10 billion worth of investments in the pipeline which would be affected or, conversely, would proceed and create thousands of jobs if a worthwhile target remained in place. There have been similar claims by other stakeholders operating within the sector. My view is that the RET is important, firstly, for our contribution towards tackling the issue of climate change; secondly, it offers opportunities for new businesses and new technologies; and, thirdly, it sustains what is already a major industry sector in this country. For that reason the work done by the government and the opposition in trying to reach a target is important. I do not agree with bringing in the changes that the government proposes in respect of the burning of woodchips, and the like, as part of the Renewable Energy Target. I do agree that, at the very least, we need to have certainty in the industry, and hopefully this legislation achieves that.

See this speech in context