Tanya Plibersek (Sydney, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. Power prices have never been higher than they are under the Liberals. The Prime Minister could take action right now to put downward pressure on power prices by pulling the trigger on gas export controls. Why won't the Prime Minister take action to reduce the power bills of Australian households now, instead of making Australians wait three years for a possible 50c saving?

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very concerned about the composition of the opposition's questions pack. They seem to have pulled out a question from the last sitting, from when we were last here over a month ago. What we have secured in terms of gas is an agreement with the big gas exporters to make sure that demand on the east coast is fulfilled, which means that there won't be a shortage of gas on the east coast, and if there isn't a shortage of gas on the east coast then there is no need to apply any restrictions on exports. It is an excellent outcome and one that has been welcomed by industry, by AiG and by BCA. It has been welcomed by industry, because they know that having gas at affordable prices in full supply—and, of course, price is a function of supply and demand, as all honourable members, on this side at least, are aware—means that businesses and energy generators and households ultimately will be paying a fairer price.

We have seen a very significant decline in wholesale prices for gas and we are seeing now industrial firms who are big consumers of gas getting longer-term contracts at much lower prices than had previously been offered, when there was a shortage. So, the government's policy worked, our action was successful and the gas is being delivered.

Touching on economics and energy economics, I have to draw attention to a very interesting interview with the member for Sydney earlier today. She said, 'If you have an emissions intensity scheme'—which she said was their preferred model—'it has no cost to taxpayers, because high polluters are subsidising less-polluting forms of technology.' So, presumably, nobody pays for that. It is wonderful. The Leader of the Opposition talks about science fiction. I think he was talking about the economics of the member for Sydney. The reality is that everything has to be paid for. The bottom line is that you have to take the best advice to secure the best policy, grounded in expertise—as ours is, with the backing of the Energy Security Board—that will deliver, as we have heard from those experts, lower wholesale prices, better outcomes for families and affordable, reliable power as well as meet our emissions reduction obligations. That is hard-headed, clear-eyed economics and engineering. That is the ticket to secure our energy future.