Cameron Caldwell (Fadden, Liberal National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise this afternoon to speak to Labor's superfluous bureaucratic proposal for a Net Zero Economy Authority. This Labor government's obsessions with big government and renewables have combined in what is potentially the most senseless proposal to take care of the unions, Canberra-centric public servants and their big corporate mates. The legislation before the House will transition the current net zero economy agency from an executive agency within the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet to a new standalone statutory authority.

By examining the detail, we can see with the Albanese Labor government's priorities lie. The authority's intended functions are described as follows: coordinate net zero policy across government, facilitate government and private participation, support affected workers, support First Nations Australians and deliver educational incentives around the transition. The first question that popped into my mind was, 'I wonder whether there will actually be a net reduction in bureaucrats within the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet or not?' We will see. It also flags, in the priorities, that the whole process of this race to net zero in world-record time is clearly going to require support for affected workers. It is inherent that the way in which Labor are approaching this that they will be causing harm. We know from experience with this underwhelming government what this bill will translate into in reality: a bureaucratic waste of an agency that will be over-resourced and that will, ultimately, underdeliver.

There are two broad aspect of this legislation that operationalise the authority's powers. The first is facilitating the new investment in the net zero transition. The authority intends to be a so-called shopfront for industry and investors. It will seek to work with projects proponents and state governments to get renewable projects to investment decision. The authority will also mobilise public moneys through vehicles like the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and the National Reconstruction Fund, with private financing support; address enabling infrastructure needs; and navigate regulatory processes. The second responsibility of the authority is the aim of assisting the impacted workers in that transition area through the Energy Industry Jobs Plan. The Energy Industry Jobs Plan would allow the authority to utilise the industrial relations system to manage the redeployment of workers in closing coal-fired and gas-fired power stations, and their dependent employers.

The plan fails to specify or anticipate the types of employment that workers may transition into. This is essentially an IR bill disguised as a bill for the regions and the transition. The coalition will oppose this bill because, ultimately, it's bureaucratic waste and duplication, because it has a top-down, Canberra-centric approach which is set to fail on delivering for the unique needs of regional Queensland and Australia, because of the imposition of new obligations on small, medium and large businesses and because of the fact that it is another example of Labor's haphazard approach on industry policy which delivers actually no guarantees for local workers.

Further evidence of the politically motivated 'jobs for the boys' agenda was announced in the budget, with the government doubling the authority's budget to nearly $400 million from 2023-24 to 2026-27 alone, with further funding to total $1.1 billion over the medium term. The federal government cannot afford to waste $1 billion on Canberra bureaucrats across the Net Zero Economy Authority, the Department of Employment and Workplace Relations and the Fair Work Commission when it has been unable to detail the actions that this authority would perform that are not already been done. Put simply, the case has not been made as to why this change is needed.

Unlike the Labor government, who have already added more than 36,000 public servants since coming to power, the coalition does not believe that the answer to every problem is more money and more bureaucracy. As others on this side of the chamber have rightly noted, this proposal is a bureaucratic waste which largely mirrors the responsibilities of existing federal and state agencies. The aspects which relate to investment in projects to facilitate the transition to a cleaner economy are already provided for through the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, CEFC, and the Australian Renewable Energy Agency, ARENA, and the role of existing mechanisms such as the Major Projects Facilitation Agency. It strikes me that this whole area of chasing net zero is a pit of acronyms—acronyms that most of us, quite frankly, don't care for. The acronyms that Australians know and are dealing with at the moment are things like HPB. And, no, that doesn't mean 'happy birthday'. That's what Australians call higher power bills. Or there's WAM—'What about me?' That's what they say in relation to this Labor government.

The new authority claims to facilitate public and private sector participation and investment in greenhouse gas emissions reduction and net zero transformation initiatives in Australia, including in new industries. This is almost copied and pasted from the Clean Energy Finance Corporation's legislated role to 'facilitate increased flows of finance into the clean energy sector and to facilitate the achievement of Australia's greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets'. It would seem, on any reading, that this is duplication. Likewise, the role of Arena is to 'improve the competitiveness of renewable energy technologies and increase the supply of renewable energy in Australia and facilitate the achievement of Australia's greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets'. The level of duplication of the proposed Net Zero Economy Authority's responsibility to promote new investment in the net zero transition and the existing Commonwealth entities is quite frankly beyond a joke. Australians deserve better than to have the same thing being done three or four times over at their expense. How many federal agencies tasked with renewable financing does this Labor government actually require?

As I highlighted earlier, we know that the proposed national body will be Canberra-centric, which poses additional risks of a top-down approach. After two years of a Labor government that has repeatedly failed to deliver for rural towns and regional cities, such as the Gold Coast, why am I not surprised to see it double-down on this backwards approach to governing? 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 climate ambitions. So, in speaking to this today, I say it's not about the ambition; it's about the way in which this terrible Labor government is yet again putting bureaucracy first and Australians last.

See this speech in context