Ted O'Brien (Fairfax, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Hansard source

Aha! I'll take the interjection from the Assistant Minister for Climate Change and Energy. You can always sniff a rat when the Socialist Left of Labor start sounding like economic rationalists. Now the argument from Labor is: 'Oh, yes, nuclear energy—tick, tick, tick. But the economics don't stack up.' You can just imagine, of course, that when the Prime Minister was over there meeting with President Biden he was explaining that the economics don't stack up with the US's plan to sign this agreement. I'm sure he said the same to Chinese President Xi Jinping. I'm sure he said the same to Prime Minister Starmer from the UK, showing him those intelligent memes from the Labor Party to demonstrate that the economics do not stack up for nuclear energy.

The Minister for Climate Change and Energy has been on record many a time suggesting that the real cost of Labor's plan to deliver a net zero electricity grid is $122 billion. When you're looking at the pathway to a net zero electricity grid, you have to compare one pathway to another, and we will be showing all the economics before this next election.

Before the member leaves after having a giggle, he should listen to this one. The team from Frontier Economics, an independent body, costed Labor's plan. Did it cost $122 billion? I give it to you once, twice—are you going to interject? No, he doesn't. Guess how much it really cost? It cost $642 billion. Now guess how many times more expensive that is than what the minister told us. It is five times more expensive—that's how much. Before you leave the chamber, member for Solomon: it is five times more expensive than what your minister told you and the rest of Australia, which is not true.

See this speech in context