Luke Howarth (Petrie, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence Industry) Share this | Hansard source

We are here today thanks to the Liberal-National coalition's groundbreaking work in establishing the AUKUS program. Without the work of the previous Minister for Defence and now Leader of the Opposition, the Hon. Peter Dutton MP, we would not be here to progress the national building AUKUS program and the subsequent conversation around nuclear power. Let me be clear: the coalition stands with the Labor government and is committed to the establishment of nuclear powered submarines as a crucial part of our national defence strategy. The reality is that without the coalition leading the way we wouldn't be here today.

Labor likes to stand as the hero of AUKUS when really they are riding on our visionary coat-tails. Back in March 2021 the now Leader of the Opposition was sworn in as the Minister for Defence. I congratulated him at that time and spoke to him about the possibility of acquiring nuclear powered submarines, and I spoke to him again in June 2021. Less than two years ago there was nothing on the table at all. There was nothing to do with AUKUS. Nuclear power was not an option. Labor were still in the current reality of where they sit in relation to nuclear power based on land, which is that it's never going to happen and they'll never support it. But as soon as they saw former Prime Minister Morrison, along with their hero President Biden and the UK Prime Minister, they were quick to say: 'Us too! We'll get on board now!' The reality is that they never supported it. It's good that, in coming to government, they have continued with the coalition's AUKUS plan.

The capability of the AUKUS nuclear powered submarines will change the face of our naval fleet, with considerable performance advantages over conventional submarines. This multigenerational legacy project will not only deliver enhanced defence capabilities; it has the potential to boost defence industry innovation, manufacturing and jobs around Australia. But potential can only translate into reality with bold, ambitious and optimistic leadership. Sadly, the Albanese government is found wanting when it comes to being prepared to tackle some of the well-recognised hurdles that AUKUS presents. There are nuclear-industry related hurdles that must be addressed and overcome if we are to get to the finish line and deliver conventionally armed nuclear powered submarine capability as early as the 2030s.

The truth is that Labor and the Greens have made 'nuclear' a dirty word, along with anything related to it. We only have to look at this week's actions of the Minister for Climate Change and Energy and his social media posts, which were quickly pulled down when he realised that he was embarrassing the government. The reality is that for a long time the Labor party has considered nuclear a dirty word and this has left Australia starved of a foundation on which we can build our nuclear industry. Defence industry tells me they have significant concerns about the government's lack of clarity, planning or policy that will build and support the nuclear industry, workforce and skill base needed. They go even further: they have significant concerns around defence industry in general for the next five years, mainly because of a lack of new funding in the DSR, which the minister so rightly likes to come into question time and talk about.

Unfortunately, a continued campaign from the left in the Labor party to harvest fear and misinformation around nuclear energy has led to hesitation from our workforce and industry to invest into this viable option for our future. With no baseline experience, we are and will continue to be found wanting for experts, a workforce and even an industry baseline awareness needed to work out the practicalities from this bill. It is predicted that we will require 200 subject matter experts in Australia to make top-level decisions regarding the eight new SSN-AUKUS subs, with at least 20 years experience in nuclear technology each. Australia faces a significant hurdle in acquiring these experts, with virtually nobody in Australia having the required experience.

As a shadow minister, I say the coalition wishes the government well. We want to see them get this experience, but there are some real concerns. Additionally, we will require a workforce that includes senior scientists, electrical and mechanical engineers, technical managers, reactor operators and even health physicists. This workforce will ideally require between seven and 10 years experience each. When you add that 4,000-plus workers will need to be trained up in nuclear awareness to help to maintain the AUKUS submarines, it is clear that we are under-resourced at every level. With only one nuclear reactor plant in operation in the whole of Australia—the Lucas Heights facility in Sydney, which is used to produce nuclear medicine and deliver neutrons for a suite of scientific instruments used in research, opportunities for hands-on experience and training at a nuclear-aware level are limited.

These are real issues that the Labor government, the Albanese government, has failed to address or provide a plan for, so I ask today: how does this government plan to recruit and upskill our own people to that level in time? There is a whole chain of events that needs to come into play to satisfy our workforce and industry needs, and the simple reality is that we don't have enough people or the skills training basis. We currently don't have the infrastructure, compliance requirements, logistics strategy, native capability, educational base or legislative allowances to satisfy the nuclear industry, and with all of these the government is failing to unpack and clarify. Words in this chamber cannot build what we need. We need a plan, clarity and leadership.

However, nuclear power is pivotal not only to the future of our defence and AUKUS submarines but for the future of Australia's energy supply. If only the Labor government's energy policy had the staying power of a nuclear submarine. The advantages of nuclear propulsion powering our submarines echo the benefits to be found through use of nuclear power to revolutionise the energy supply base of our nation. In the second reading of this bill, the minister took the opportunity to clarify Labor's position of not supporting a nuclear energy base for our future. Let me take this opportunity to restate the bold leadership from the opposition in the coalition's consideration of next-generation, emission-free, small modular nuclear technology. We're not afraid of the conversation. The technologies are safe, reliable and cost-effective. Unlike Labor, who lead through fear, we lead through vision, and we have new leadership now under Peter Dutton and vision that reflects what we now know Australians want.

In fact, Labor and the Greens espouse that they are representing the views of their constituents and supporters but conveniently fail to mention that, according to several recent polls, they are off the mark, with 53 per cent of Australians agreeing with the statement 'Australia should build nuclear power plant to supply electricity and reduce carbon emissions as we move towards 2050.' This included 52 per cent of Labor voters and 44 per cent of Greens voters supporting construction. Yet those opposite refuse to have the mature conversation. Just as they were led to this vision, history will find them being led to visions by the coalition around emissions-free nuclear power.

The truth is that Labor continues to deceive the Australian people with its contradictory energy policy. On one hand, they stand in this House and promote nuclear power propulsion in their defence strategy, whilst at the same time demonising the benefits of transitioning to low-emissions use of nuclear power as an alternative energy source to get us to net zero emissions by 2050. Instead of informing Australians about the advantages that small modular emissions-free nuclear power could offer, they prefer to trade a viable energy alternative for political votes, harvested on a scare campaign, refusing to consider the benefits of onshore small and micromodular options. By doing so, Australia is left behind the rest of the world, as 50 countries are exploring or investing in next-generation technology, with 32 countries, including Canada, China, France, the United States and the United Kingdom, using zero-emissions nuclear power today, including to firm up renewables.

Reducing carbon emissions is our responsibility to this nation, and there is no debating that we all want to see emissions go down. The 2050 policy has bipartisan support. But the cutting of emissions cannot come at the expense of cutting energy supply, reliability and affordability. The coalition prioritised this, and between 2013 and 2021 cut Australia's emissions by 17 per cent while growing the economy and creating jobs. We must boldly invest in and commit to long-term reliable and safe energy alternatives. And whilst billions of dollars have been invested in alternatives like wind and solar, they're still generating only 12 per cent, and the cost around their high transmission lines will run into tens of billions of dollars, not to mention the environmental impact.

The scientific reality is that we must firm up the energy grid, and with the government against coal and nuclear, What remains? To distribute renewable energy, more than $100 billion will need to be spent on 28,000 kilometres of transmission lines, and these poles and wires will run through everywhere—a fact the Labor government failed to mention when singing the environmental virtues of their plan. The reality exposed by other countries that have failed to consider nuclear options should provide us with warning. People in countries like Germany, Italy and Denmark are now paying a heavy price, paying nearly double the electricity costs of Australia and six times the costs of Canada, which is using nuclear power as an alternative, as the member for Hinkler would know.

At a time when cost of living is becoming the No. 1 issue for Australians under the Albanese government, there is no excuse for this government, who continue to use fear and misinformation to secure their political position, rather than present viable options to address the real impact of energy costs. Every dollar that the Albanese government continue to spend on their renewable energy plan is being passed on to the people in my electorate and other parts of Australia in the form of higher electricity bills. This week Prime Minister Albanese and his government presented the opportunity to Australia to be an energy superpower, and on this we agree. We do and always have had the potential to be a major player on the world stage when it comes to energy supply. However, we need to make choices and set priorities to get the best result.

However, sadly, under this government, instead of becoming an energy superpower, we are watching our opportunities fade as this government continues to neglect our own industry and innovation potential in favour of reliance on overseas imports and supply chains. As I said before, there is not a dollar extra in the DSR over the next four years, and defence industry are screaming for orders; they want to be fed. But we know that they won't be fed under the Albanese government. In addition, as states like Queensland place more and more limitations on our ability to mine natural resources like uranium, we will remain behind the eight ball when it truly comes to being an energy superpower. Our own wind and solar capabilities are dependent on import markets—cheap solar panel imports from China, cheap imports from China for wind farms. And these are the very countries it is not in our national interest to be funding.

We simply cannot continue to play games with our defence policy, nor our energy policy. Just like we are investing in nuclear power propulsion for our Defence Force capability, we must consider nuclear power as a viable option for the nation's energy capability. How can the government face the Australian people when it stands here today promoting the value of emissions-free nuclear powered submarines and yet fails to address the shared benefits that this energy source could provide in their everyday lives?

The challenge around base-load power is one that is well recognised across the world, and many other countries have responded sensibly and seriously with a zero-emissions nuclear energy policy. That's why we will continue to lead the discussion not only on nuclear propulsion for our submarines—we did so when we signed the AUKUS agreement under the former Prime Minister and the former defence minister—but also on next-generation zero-emissions small and micro nuclear technologies as a viable answer to Australia's energy needs

Our aspiration must be achievable and focused on the type of Australia we want our children to inherit mid-century: a nation that is cleaner and healthier but also richer, stronger and independent. The words of the Leader of the Opposition, 'That is policy pragmatism,' are true.

See this speech in context