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

Last Friday in Yass I had the opportunity to sit and talk at length with three concerned advocates, Hansie Armour, Rebecca Tobin and Andrea Strong, in relation to the powerlines on huge towers that are going to go through their wonderful part of the world. There has been a lot of controversy about these powerlines and the height of the towers upon which they will sit. These three advocates are genuine in their desires to see the lines placed underground, and had a number of cogent and reasonable arguments as to why this should be so.

The thing that often concerns me when companies and organisations and, dare I say, governments put in place infrastructure that is going to affect people's vista, communities or environment is that all too often when the representative is sent out to knock on the door or to visit the farm, they come there with only scant details of the actual project. When they come there again, it's a different person altogether. When they line up at the community forums which often happen as a result of community concerns being raised and not answered or met, again, it's a different representative. I'm not saying this is the case on this particular project, but it also bothers me greatly that these days we seem to have in this nation—particularly in New South Wales—projects placed under state-significant status. State-significant priority supersedes all local development plans. It overrides any community concerns. It rides roughshod over what a local government or a council can do about a particular project. Whether it's powerlines and towers, solar farms, wind turbines—you name it—it's stamped 'state significant' and locals do not get any say in that project. Generally, that project will be financed by an overseas company or a superannuation firm. They'll claim a whole heap of jobs in the construction phase, and that's all well and good—we all want more jobs. But often these projects come at a huge cost to local people, their amenity, their views and their environment. I think something really needs to be done with the EPBC Act, with these 'state significant' projects, to say 'enough is enough'. Locals must get a say. There has to be some consideration.

What we have before us is the Electricity Infrastructure Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. It was introduced to the House, rather unexpectedly, with a view to being passed before the parliament rises. Many people in the corridors here will be telling you that this is the last parliamentary sitting week. We saw what happened on the last parliamentary sitting day last year when Labor rushed through a whole heap of legislation. Debate was guillotined, debate was gagged and bills went through—to hell with people's local concerns. People who have been sent here to represent their local constituents weren't able to speak on a bill. They weren't able to raise objections against a bill. Labor just bulldozed it through. Labor, which came to office in May 2022, said it was going to be—

See this speech in context