Michelle Landry (Capricornia, National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Manufacturing) Share this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on the Net Zero Economy Authority Bill 2024 and related bill. I will not be supporting this ludicrous legislation. Like many communities right across the country, my electorate of Capricornia is experiencing the full brunt of this government's ideological push for irresponsible net zero target. In the Rockhampton region alone, the numerous wind farms are scarring the landscape of untouched remnant vegetation and prime agricultural land, while in the north of the electorate locals in the Eungella region are facing a David-and-Goliath battle to stop the state Labor government's attempt to build what they are describing as the world's largest pumped hydro scheme. Community groups already navigating a complex array of departmental regulation to oppose industrial-scale renewable energy projects near their homes now face increased government pressure favouring companies investing in renewable energy in the form of this Net Zero Economy Authority.

The Net Zero Economy Authority's primary purpose is to facilitate new investment in the net zero transition. It aims to serve as a shopfront for industry and investors and to work closely with project proponents and state governments to advance renewable projects to the investment decision stage. Additionally, the authority will mobilise public funds through the likes of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and the National Reconstruction Fund. To note just how well this government's National Reconstruction Fund is performing, to date not one cent has been spent from the $15 billion intended to assist industries.

The Net Zero Economy Authority aims to expediate the development of green energy projects, leveraging public investments to attract further private sector involvement and hasten progress towards net zero emissions at a rushed pace. I am witnessing firsthand the significant impact of this rushed approach towards achieving 82 per cent renewable energy by 2030. This hasty push will have long-lasting consequences for generations of Australians. One major concern is the loss of prime agricultural land which has been converted for large-scale industrial renewable energy projects. This not only threatens our agriculture output and food security but also disrupts the livelihoods of many rural communities.

Moreover, the substantial financial burden on the public purse cannot be ignored. The aggressive drive for renewable energy is leading to enormous public expenditures which may not be sustainable in the long term. The reckless pace of this transition risks prioritising short-term gains over thoughtful strategic planning, ultimately jeopardising both our economy and our environment. Generations of Australians will feel the repercussions of this approach, facing both the economic impacts and the challenges of adapting to a transformed landscape.

I ask those opposite: how many have sat on the verandah of a local grazier's home and met with people who are being directly impacted by this rush for unrealistic renewable energy targets? How many have sat with a farmer with a young family, who intended to pass his hard work and investment on to his children, only for it to be ripped away in the name of renewable energy targets? I have, and I must say that it is heartbreaking to see how these communities in regional Australia are being bulldozed away to make sure those who live in the city can feel good when they turn on a light. The human impact, the toll it is taking on regional Australia, is immeasurable.

The legislation put forward is another nail in the coffin for these communities to fight back against renewable energy projects which are being placed in irresponsible locations. The Pioneer-Burdekin Pumped Hydro Project is a prime example of a renewable energy project which will destroy one of Australia's most pristine natural wilderness areas. Initially estimated at a cost of $12 billion, this project has already blown out enormously to an astonishing $18 billion. If the Pioneer-Burdekin Pumped Hydro Project is to be anything like the Snowy 2.0 shambles, which has been propped up by extensive federal funding, it is a dire sign of taxpayer money being spent with abandon to achieve net zero dreams.

This legislation before us is problematic for several reasons. Firstly, it contributes to bureaucratic waste and duplication, adding unnecessary layers of administration without tangible benefits. The approach being proposed is top-down and centred in Canberra, which makes it ill suited to addressing the unique needs of regional areas. The centralised method is bound to fail in effectively serving the diverse parts of different communities. Additionally, the legislation imposes new obligations on businesses of all sizes: small, medium and large. These added responsibilities could hinder business operations and growth, creating more challenges than solutions for the business sector. Moreover, this proposal exemplifies Labor's inconsistent and erratic approach to industry policy. It lacks clear guarantees for local workers, leaving their employment and wellbeing uncertain.

On top of the significant flaws in this piece of legislation, we found out in the budget that the government has doubled the authority's budget to $399.1 million from 2023-24 to 2026-27, with further funding to total $1.1 billion over the medium term. The federal government cannot afford to waste over $1 billion on Canberra bureaucrats across the Net Zero Economy Authority, the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations, and the Fair Work Commission, especially when it has been unable to detail the actions this authority will perform that are not already being done. The potential for bureaucratic inefficiency, the one-size-fits-all strategy, the burdens on businesses and the absence of assured benefits for local workers make it a flawed proposal. The significant increase in the authority's budget, amounting to over $1 billion, is an unjustifiable expenditure given the lack of clear, additional benefits it would provide.

The Net Zero Economy Authority is weaving a tangled web of bureaucratic confusion, with the facility largely duplicating the responsibilities already managed by the existing federal and state agencies. The authority is explicitly tasked with:

… facilitating public and private sector participation and investment in greenhouse gas emissions reduction and net zero transformation initiatives in Australia, including in new industries …

This mandate aims to drive significant engagement and funding towards reducing emissions and fostering new industries geared towards a net zero economy. However, this role appears to closely mirror the Clean Energy Finance Corporation's legislated responsibility, which is:

To facilitate increased flows of finance into the clean energy sector and to facilitate the achievement of Australia's greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets.

The overlap in responsibilities raises concerns about the necessity and efficiency of the new authority, given that similar functions are already being performed by existing agencies.

How many federal agencies tasked with renewable financing does the Commonwealth require? The abundance of such agencies raises questions about efficiency and necessity, as overlapping responsibilities can lead to bureaucratic redundancy and wasted resources. This approach, focused on facilitating investment consistent with net zero ambitions, also leans into the government's preference for picking winners rather than fostering genuine investment facilitation and job creation. By selectively supporting certain initiatives, the government risks neglecting broader, potentially more impactful opportunities. It is also likely that, once established, the federal government will continue to add additional powers and responsibilities to the authority to support its net zero and climate ambitions. This potential for expanded authority raises the question: will the government rule out giving this Net Zero Economy Authority new powers to streamline and expedite regulatory approvals or financing for transformational green energy projects?

As I said previously, the funding for this authority and its related activities is budgeted at $399.1 million from 2023-24 to 2026-27, with further funding totalling $1.1 billion over the medium term. This substantial allocation is on top of the billions of dollars of additional funding being channelled into the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, the Australian Renewable Energy Agency and the newly branded Future Made in Australia initiative. Despite these significant investments, over $13 billion in taxpayer funded subsidies for big businesses do not address the root causes of Labor's cost-of-living crisis. Green hydrogen and critical minerals being pushed by billionaires should stand up on their own merit without the need for taxpayers' money. Labor's focus should be on addressing energy costs, high inflation and out-of-control red tape. Instead, Labor continuously fails to tackle the fundamental issues facing most Australian businesses.

With insolvencies at record highs and more businesses moving offshore, supporting a small number of big businesses is irresponsible and a slap in the face to small businesses desperately seeking answers from this government to survive. The duplication of efforts between the Net Zero Economy Authority and existing Commonwealth institutions highlights a complete waste of over $1 billion of federal government funds over the forward estimates. The Net Zero Economy Authority Bill represents another pie-in-the-sky, rushed piece of legislation that will not help my constituents in Capricornia. The promise of local jobs for local people within the renewable energy sector remains unfulfilled, further illustrating the disconnect between the government's ambitious plans and the practical needs of the community.

See this speech in context