Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Hansard source

Well, yes, thanks. Absolutely. If we are to get to net zero, let's have a national, rational discussion about nuclear power. We've got uranium supplies—very bountiful supplies of yellowcake. Why wouldn't we have the national discussion instead of producing, as you've done, silly little memes with three-eyed fish from The Simpsons and the like? Why wouldn't we have a national, rational discussion about nuclear as an option? That's the trouble. Labor members knock and mock ideas, but let's have the discussion about having balance, about having options in our power mix. Let's not just go to wind and solar and wholly and solely go down that path, because let me tell you: there is a lot of prime agricultural land at the moment which is being taken up with projects that are then placed under state-significant development approvals et cetera, which are usurping local councils' ability even to look at projects. What they're doing is taking the best available farmland, which, I might add, grows our food and our fibre and puts food on our plates and clothes on our backs, not just for this nation but for many others.

So the coalition is opposing this bill. We've put forward a sensible amendment, as you'd expect. As the shadow Treasurer has just said, this is a slogan in search of a policy: Future Made in Australia. It's an ill named bill, like most Labor policies. Labor's policies on workplace reform through flexibility are just run by the unions. We saw what John Setka did and said yesterday, and this policy is— (Time expired)

See this speech in context