Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

This motion by the member for Fairfax highlights, once again, the vacuum in energy policy that still exists amongst the coalition. As the member for Fremantle quite rightly pointed out, the opposition were in government for nearly a decade. They were in government at a time when we knew the country had to transition away from fossil fuels. They knew that there was a number of coal-fired power stations that were destined to close and they knew that we had to meet emissions reduction targets, and yet they could not land a single energy policy throughout all of that time. Indeed, we knew when they were in office that we were heading for energy price rises to the extent that just before the 2022 election—as we now know—there was a report given to them which outlined that energy prices would go on to rise. And yet they hid that from the public in order to try to camouflage the issue of energy prices as we went into the election.

When the Albanese government was elected and we did indeed start to look at what we could do to try and manage rising energy prices, we capped coal and gas prices. What did those on the other side do? They opposed those very initiatives which went straight to the heart of trying to put a lid on rising energy prices. Indeed, those initiatives have made a real difference. What we're seeing now is a coalition that is simply using this kind of motion as nothing more than a political campaign tool. They don't have any answer, and if members bothered to read this 11-part motion they'd see there is nothing within it that articulates what the coalition would do if they were in government. In fact, part 2, which is the only part that refers to any such thing, says that a complete assessment be done to determine 'the true optimum investment pathway for Australia's energy market' and that 'all of the above'—what is the above? There is nothing in the first nine parts of the motion they refer to—be considered as part of a future energy plan. It's all about the consideration with no specific proposal.

If you want to criticise Labor's proposals that we currently have before the Australian people, by all means do that. But at least have the decency to put up what the alternative is. We know from comments made by others that their response to date has simply been that we should look to small modular nuclear reactors. The reality is that throughout the world I understand that there are only two such reactors, one which is a demonstration unit in China and the other which is on a barge in Russia. In other words, if they were going to work and were the true alternative, why aren't they in use everywhere else? Even if they were the alternative, we know full well that they're a decade away. People need a response, and they need a policy right now. In fact, they needed it 10 years ago, when the coalition government first took office. They can't wait 10 years, and, if we did go down that path, the reality is that it would cost some 18 times more than the renewable energy pathway that the Albanese government is on.

Those figures don't come from some airy-fairy person, such as, again, the motion talks about. It talks about an independent analysis from a leading Australian energy economist. They don't name who that person or company doing the independent analysis is, which begs the question: why not? The response to the Albanese Labor government comes from a report done by AEMO and CSIRO. It's okay to rely on the true experts in this country when it suits the argument, but then, when it does not suit your argument, you dismiss them.

The Albanese Labor government is indeed getting on with trying to do something about the energy costs in this nation. We have the Rewiring the Nation project and plan that is already underway. We are encouraging and supporting renewable energy investments, as we heard today in question time from the Minister for the Environment and Water who outlined some of those major projects where investments are being made. We are also providing energy rebates to the most vulnerable. Fixing the energy crisis is a priority of this government. It is not going to be easy, especially when it has been neglected for nearly a decade, but this government is getting on with the job of doing just that.

See this speech in context