Jenny Ware (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Electricity Infrastructure Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. We are opposing this bill, on our side. I think we need to start with looking at what this legislation is all about. This legislation is in response to a massive loss that the Minister for Climate Change and Energy, Chris Bowen, had in the Federal Court at the end of last year. I say that as a recovering planning, environmental and housing lawyer! In the case of Seadragon Offshore Wind Pty Ltd v Minister for Climate Change and Energy, the Federal Court held at the end of last year that the federal Minister for Climate Change and Energy may lawfully grant a feasibility licence for an offshore wind farm development over a smaller area than applied for by the applicant. So this legislation concerns offshore wind.

About 20 years ago, when I was a partner in a law firm, I had a client who was looking at onshore wind projects down in the state of Victoria. We negotiated and negotiated, and in the end the deal did not go ahead for the simple reason that the economics of onshore wind did not stack up in that particular location.

I have always been absolutely committed to net zero. Those on our side have said—and through our leader, Peter Dutton—that we have absolutely committed to the net zero target by 2050. How we get there is where we disagree with those on the other side. The Minister for Climate Change and Energy and the Prime Minister have completely and utterly stuffed energy policy in this parliament under this Albanese Labor government. We have some ridiculous examples of energy policy. Let me start with the big announcements during the election campaign. We're coming up to the three-year anniversary of the $275 cut to power bills' that we were allegedly all going to get. Instead, most Australians have seen their power bills increase by a thousand dollars. That was the big headline—they were going to reduce; they haven't. Let's look at some of the ridiculous examples of how their energy policy is playing out in practice.

Victoria—your home state, Deputy Speaker McKenzie—because of the decisions by the state government under the former Premier, is now importing gas when it has enough gas to power almost all of Australia. It has said no to gas, which is supported by the federal minister—'No to gas; we don't want gas.' Instead, we're now importing gas into this country at the same time that we are exporting gas to some of our trading partners, such as India. How on earth is that any sort of way to run energy? The dislike of gas has meant that Labor has now moved firmly to committing only to renewable energy and, as our coal-fired power plants are coming to the natural end of their lives, what this government has failed to do is develop any other sensible base-load power. Solar is fine when the sun's shining. Wind is okay in certain circumstances—when the wind is blowing. When it is not, what do we do?

We've relied on coal for years and we are rightly now moving away from the coal of yesteryear, but Labor will not even look at embracing nuclear energy, which has been embraced by all of our other major trading partners. It's been used for years in Europe and in America. In my electorate of Hughes, I do of course have the only nuclear plant in the country, and I'm very proud of the work that's done down at ANSTO. They do work with nuclear medicine and they do a lot of work in nuclear research, and it's certainly not the position of the coalition that we would be in any way expanding that for nuclear power. But I said in my first speech in this place that it seems to me ridiculous that we are not looking at harnessing the nuclear technology and the expertise that we already have in this country and how we can use them to reach net zero.

Nuclear energy is now safe. I have said on many occasions as well that my 15-year-old self that had posters of Midnight Oil and used to wear the 'no nukes' T-shirts would be shuddering at me promoting nuclear in this way. But the nuclear energy of the 21st century is very different to the nuclear energy of the past, and it is well and truly time that we embrace this, because the government's approach on this is, with respect, pig-headed and obstinate. Why is it that Minister Bowen won't even engage in any meaningful discussion on this? I have invited Minister Bowen to come out my electorate of Hughes to have a look at the nuclear facility; he refuses. Why is that? Why bury your head in the sand so much? Why stand there and say that he is a person of science and innovation and then refuse to consider or even go out and visit a plant to learn more about the nuclear industry?

Nuclear power will eventually be in this country. We just need to look at the many contributions that nuclear has made to our country already. Every single person in Australia that has to have any sort of treatment for cancer is availing themself of technology that has been developed through the nuclear medicine facility at ANSTO in my electorate. Thankfully, we have signed up to the AUKUS arrangement for nuclear powered submarines. This will be a big boost to our industry. It's a very important defence relationship, and it reflects the importance that both America and Great Britain have to Australia historically and militarily.

If we say that nuclear can be used in medicine to save lives, and nuclear needs to become part of our defence and our security to protect Australians, why can't nuclear be used to power our homes? That's the question that Minister Bowen absolutely refuses to answer. When I return to wind power, which is the subject of this legislation, I am a proponent of looking at a whole hybrid mix of energy. I think that wind plays a part, and solar—certainly in a country as hot as ours with as much sun as we get—has a very big part to play. But so too does gas and so to does nuclear.

But now, with Labor's offshore wind projects, for example, it has been shown the investors and the proponents of those offshore wind projects have pulled out down in the Illawarra. They've said, 'This is not going to work here.' The local communities down in the Illawarra, which is not too far from my seat of Hughes—local fishermen and local environmentalists—have said it is completely unacceptable that this will happen in our electorate. Minister Bowen has kept saying, 'No, it has to go ahead.' It's not going ahead now, and the communities were right. They were right to stand up to this government and to the minister and say: 'Why are we going to rip up our sea beds? Why are we going to potentially interfere with the whales' migratory patterns? Why are we going to do all of this in the name of supposedly saving the environment? Are we going to destroy the environment to save the environment?' It makes no sense, and Australians are far more sensible than the Prime Minister and the minister for the environment give them credit for.

When I first did some work on onshore wind projects, there were many sites that were identified where the economics did not stack up, and local communities were so opposed to those going on in their community that they fell away. I think that part of the reason that Minister Bowen is so supportive of offshore wind is that onshore wind has failed. Onshore wind has largely failed. There are some parts and some companies that have been able to make it work, but, overall, the approach has not worked.

So I say to the Albanese Labor government, and I say to Minister Bowen: come out to my electorate. Have a look at nuclear. Don't put all of your eggs into the renewables-only basket. It makes no sense. Our energy going forward is absolutely crucial for households, for families, for businesses, for our manufacturing, for our industry. Why won't Labor open their eyes, open their minds and consider nuclear as part of the mix to resolve our energy crisis going forward?

Debate adjourned.

Federation Chamber adjourned at 19:56

See this speech in context