Tania Lawrence (Hasluck, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

A year ago, a little after sunrise on 25 October 2022, the member for Fairfax was happy to stand in this place and try to take credit for the rollout of solar and wind power in Australia, almost all of which, to that date, was supported by state government policies. He then suggested that the Albanese government's targets were too ambitious. Then, of course, he also voted against the climate change bill, and, in December, he voted against the price cap and so voted against lower energy bills for all Australians, just as other members of the opposition did. It is beyond bewildering that anyone has bothered to show up to debate this motion—although it can't be said for the member for Fairfax, who is not here to debate his own motion, with the member for Hughes standing there on shaky ground trying to take his place. I hope my speaking on this odd coalition motion doesn't lend any semblance of credibility to it, but I feel obliged to do so as a member of the government committed to tackling carbon emissions and the massive task of transitioning away from reliance on fossil fuels and towards cheap and reliable renewable sources of energy.

After a decade on the Treasury benches, the coalition have amassed a string of best hits in relation to energy policy. In the wake of Prime Minister Tony Abbott tearing up the most effective carbon abatement policy this country has had to date, we had direct action followed by, 'This is coal,' when under Turnbull's prime ministership the soon-to-be next prime minister and now member for Cook implored us not to be scared of a lump of coal. That is the coalition, always wishing it was the mid-20th century. We then saw a rejection of the clean energy target and the introduction of the National Energy Guarantee followed by the scrapping of the renewable energy targets. Then those opposite went all Soviet on us and threatened to use taxpayer dollars to build a coal-fired power plant. We were assured we would make our Paris targets in a canter. Then we saw huge investments in hydro and batteries, but that made a few of those opposite uncomfortable so we then got the gas-led recovery. Over the last decade the coalition have presided over four gigawatts of dispatchable energy, leaving the national energy market with only one gigawatt coming back in. Now they pretend to form policy while only flirting with the nuclear industry.

Like most areas of policy and government this means Australia has a lot of catching up to do, but that catching up has begun under the Albanese Labor government and will continue. In the less than 18 months of Albanese government we have already provided business and investors with the certainty that they crave by legislating emission reduction targets and setting new renewable energy targets. We have capped gas prices to keep electricity prices from spiralling out of control after the coalition kept Australians in the dark in relation to how bad the energy crisis was in the dying days of their government. We have put in place proper incentives for industry to reduce their emissions output through the legislated safeguards mechanism. We have reinvigorated ARENA and the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. We're investing in hydrogen, solar, on and offshore wind, transmission and the training required to ensure skilled workers are there to keep the lights on for all of us. Australia under Prime Minister Albanese, Minister Bowen and Minister Plibersek is once more being taken seriously on the international stage.

The GenCost report by the CSIRO and AEMO does include the cost of transmission and storage for renewables. It is not uncommon for the coalition to undervalue the CSIRO. Some members opposite may well find it confronting to learn that governments and legislators are always obliged to accept and act on the best scientific advice available. In relation to nuclear energy, the member for Fairfax appears to favour that the GenCost report indicates the nuclear path would be five times more expensive than renewables. The SNRs also promise to be dirtier, creating more nuclear waste. Feasibility is a live issue, and the time frame within which such reactors might be able to be constructed means they would only start to provide energy next decade, by which time the march of renewables will be so progressed as to make the coalition's nuclear thought bubble more farcical than it is now. The sun will rise in the morning, and it's not a metaphor. The sun will rise each and every day in this country, and each and every day it will shine on more solar panels and push wind through more turbines than it did the day before. The member for Fairfax and the opposition need to catch up. The world is turning without them.

See this speech in context