Zali Steggall (Warringah, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I move:

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent the private Members' business order of the day relating to the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Stopping PEP11) Bill 2021 standing in the name of the Member for Warringah being called on immediately and given priority over all other business for final determination of the House.

This motion must be debated today because it deals with vital issues: climate change, environmental destruction and the fate of the economy for a significant portion of the east coast of Australia. Petroleum exploration permit 11, known as PEP-11, is a work permit granted under the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006. PEP-11 covers some 4,575 square kilometres of ocean from Newcastle through the Central Coast to the iconic Manly Beach. PEP-11 comes as close as five kilometres to the shore in places. Human line of sight on the horizon is over five kilometres, so gas rigs may well be seen from our headlands and beaches. The titleholders, Advent Energy and Bounty NL, are permitted to explore for gas and oil in this area, with the aim of mining it and drilling it at a future date. Let's be clear: oil is often found alongside gas, so it is a very real prospect. This licence has been hanging over the heads of our local communities for too long.

I presented a petition to this parliament in February 2020 and have spoken numerous times in this place about the project. I have met with the Minister for Resources and Water, Minister Pitt. The community has written to and met with local MPs from both sides of the House. The New South Wales government rejected the licence last February—over a year ago. Yet Advent Energy called for tenders in June this year, issuing a tender for drilling and management services on 20 July and a letter of intent to award tenders on 14 October. As recently as 20 October, comments in the media by David Breeze, the executive director of Advent Energy, indicated that Advent has every intention to proceed with the project, dismissing concerns of local communities.

So here we are: PEP-11 is still on foot, and Minister Pitt, a Queensland Liberal-National MP, is still giving enough assurance to Advent Energy that they are seeking tenders for equipment to drill the works on PEP-11. In recent interviews it has been made clear that Advent Energy believe that the licence will be granted and extended. This raises serious concerns about who is making the decisions in this government.

This is the government's gas obsession taken to the extreme of endangering our local economies and coastline. Our local environment sustains our local economy, from coastal ecosystems, fishing, tourism and hospitality, our welfare and our health. We have seen, through the last 18 months with COVID, how important our local environment is. It has sustained us and we have been grateful, and now we urgently need to protect it. The area in and adjacent to PEP-11 is home to millions of people, a whale migration path and significant marine biodiversity. It's therefore absolutely in the public interest that this be dealt with without delay today.

With only 10 days before the conference of the parties at COP26, where global leaders will meet in Glasgow to discuss how we will mitigate the issue of our time—climate change and global warming—it is urgent that we debate a motion on a bill that will stop a major fossil fuel project. The Bureau of Meteorology has projected that on the current emissions trajectory Australia will surpass 4.4 degrees of warming in this century. We are set to reach 1.5 degrees of warming in the early 2030s. Australia will warm faster than the rest of the globe and will experience many more impacts—floods, fires, droughts and, for coastal communities, coastal erosion and cyclones. We are exposed. This is our greatest national security risk, and we are falling behind our allies in addressing it.

To avert this catastrophe, the International Energy Agency—one of the most conservative institutions—has stated that no new fossil fuel projects can be developed from this year. Yet here we are with a licence to open up gas off our coast. Oil and gas exploration risks contamination and pollution of the ocean. Our ocean is fragile and already under increasing threat from climate change and plastics pollution. We cannot and should not risk an oil spill from a drilling rig wrecking our ocean and waterways, which are some of the most unique in the world. Many will not forget the Deepwater Horizon spill that occurred in April 2010 in the Gulf of Mexico. Over a period of weeks it released almost 4.9 million barrels of oil into the ocean, making it the biggest oil calamity the world had ever seen. The spill extensively impacted the marine environment and did incalculable damage to the fishing and tourism industries that relied on the spill area. The areas adjacent to PEP-11 are just as exposed. Just two months ago, the world stood aghast when we saw an undersea gas pipeline leak and catch fire in the gulf yet again, literally setting the ocean alight. This is what can go wrong.

Make no mistake: undertaking oil and gas exploration risks disaster off our pristine coast. PEP-11 could devastate the environment and the economy of all areas adjacent to it. This is why this motion must be debated today, without delay, and this bill should be passed. We simply cannot allow it to proceed. The community is united in objecting to this project. We do not want it to proceed. Over 60,000 people lent their names to a petition calling for PEP-11 to be stopped. The community's wish is that PEP-11 be stopped today. I've had hundreds of emails from Warringah constituents and people up and down the coast. They're appalled that this project might still get the green light.

PEP-11 expired in February 2021, and yet it is still in force, pending the decision of Minister Pitt, as part of the joint authority, in relation to the application by the current titleholder. The first application for the suspension, extension and variation of PEP-11 was made to the joint authority some 289 days ago, and yet the New South Wales government was able to decline it in February 2020—and we are still here, waiting for a decision from the federal government. The delay in decision-making is causing considerable anxiety and distress in the communities affected by PEP-11.

This motion is to enable the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Stopping PEP11) Bill 2021 to be debated without further delay—and we should do this today. We need to act to remove the uncertainty and preclude any current and future development in the PEP-11 area. It is so important for our local communities. These communities have been battered and locked down under COVID. They need to rebuild. Our ecotourism, our tourism, our hospitality all need confidence and certainty, and having this risk hanging over them is impacting their confidence in the rebuild. It's vital that this licence be cancelled without further delay, and we must rule out any further licence being granted off our coast.

There are those who are claiming that some of the benefits of this licence will be to provide carbon capture and storage opportunities. Let's be really clear about what that is: it is a unicorn fantasy of this government that we can continue to emit and that somehow it won't matter because those rising emissions can be offset. It ignores the fact that we actually need to reduce emissions first. We can't continue the way we are. If carbon capture and storage can be developed to work then it might assist in capturing the excess that we have already put into the atmosphere, but it cannot be used to justify our continued dependence on fossil fuel. It doesn't replace the need to reduce emissions. It's already received substantial amounts of public funding to date, but let's be clear: it has failed to deliver. We cannot continue emitting in the hope that, magically, CCS will solve this problem—and I know the minister for energy is really attached to the idea that this unicorn solution will permit emissions to continue to rise. But, to protect our oceans and coastal economies and address climate change, we should deal with this bill today and we should pass this legislation.

To all those members in this place who have said that they are for climate action and who tell their constituents as much, will you now vote to debate this bill? Will you vote with your conscience? It is really important, because the time has come when communities are looking to their members of parliament for action. The actions you take on behalf of a collective, with impunity, do not excuse your personal actions. Your personal vote matters. The member for Wentworth, the member for Mackellar, the member for North Sydney and the member for Robertson have said to their communities that they oppose this project, and yet here we are: we are still in the hands of Minister Pitt. It's time to allow debate on this bill so that we can vote on it. This is a test for the government, and it's a test for those MPs. It is a test of their commitment to their communities up and down our coast.

The Prime Minister himself came to Collaroy Beach and said he opposes the project, and yet here we are: a project is still on foot, a permit holder is still proceeding, decisions are still being made and the licence is still going ahead. It begs the question: who is calling the shots in this government? If the Prime Minister has said he doesn't support this project, and yet Minister Pitt is still proceeding with it, it really begs the question: exactly who decides what is happening in this government? Who is deciding Australia's climate policy? Is there any genuine commitment to reducing emissions? These are the questions the Australian public is asking this parliament to understand how real the commitment is.

Today, this motion is a test. It is a test to see if there is a genuine desire to debate and to take action on legislation that will stop this project. We need to save our coast.

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Pat Conroy (Shortland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I proudly second this motion to suspend the standing orders. Standing orders must be suspended because my community and every community in the Hunter, Central Coast and northern Sydney regions needs certainty about this project. The licence for PEP-11 expired on 12 February. At that time Minister Pitt said that he would make a decision soon. Since that expiration my community has had 251 days of uncertainty. My community have been in agony for 251 days waiting to know whether they're going to see oil and gas rigs off their coast. We continue to have this delay and Advent Energy continue to work on the project while this uncertainty continues.

What are we talking about? We're talking about offshore oil and gas drilling rigs as close as five kilometres to our pristine coastline and five kilometres to some of the beautiful beaches in my electorate, such as Redhead Beach, endangering our environment and the tens of thousands of jobs that rely on that environment. This project risks the thousands of jobs in our tourism and hospitality industries that rely upon our coastal lifestyle. It risks the thousands of jobs in the commercial and recreational fishing industries that rely on our pristine maritime environment. It risks the beautiful beaches that we all enjoy.

Nipper season is around the corner. As thousands of kids go back into the water, including my own, I don't want them to be worried about whether this will be the last year they get to enjoy our beautiful beaches. That's why the standing orders must be suspended and why everyone in this chamber must vote in support of the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Stopping PEP11) Bill 2021. Everyone in this chamber must vote in support of this bill. The members for Robertson, Mackellar, North Sydney and Wentworth profess to oppose PEP-11 but have gone missing. They say they oppose PEP-11. They need to demonstrate it by not just talking about it but by voting for the suspension of the standing orders and by forcing the government and the Prime Minister to deliver at least 26 members of their party room to allow the suspension to succeed. It's easy for them to get up and say, 'We oppose it and we'll vote for the suspension,' knowing that it will fail unless they bring 26 members of their party room with them. That's the truth.

The member for Robertson said on 24 April:

Under a Morrison Government PEP-11 will not go ahead.

The Prime Minister, Scott Morrison … said it himself while he was on the Coast this week, and he is rock solid on that decision.

I am saying no to PEP-11. The Prime Minister is saying no to PEP-11.

I look forward to the member for Robertson's remarks. Hopefully, she will get up and say that the project is dead. Unless she votes for the suspension, unless she votes for the Steggall bill and unless she brings 26 members of the government with her, they are just hollow words—hollow words from a member of the government that so far is allowing offshore oil and gas drilling off our coast. That is the truth of it.

We'll see some charades here—do they support this or do they support that? The government and Minister Pitt could kill this with the stroke of a pen. Failing that, 26 members of the government could cross the floor and vote for the suspension and then the actual bill. I hope they do. I will say to them, 'Well done,' if they do. If they don't, they will be accused of utter mendacity and hypocrisy, because there will be empty words where action is needed.

This is about the future of our coastline. This is about the future of tens of thousands of jobs in our community. I hope Minister Hawke gets up and says something positive about it. I hope Minister Hawke says that the project is now dead. Hopefully, he will kill it. Hopefully, he will convince the Nationals, who are really running this government on climate and energy policy, to do the right thing and kill the project. I'm looking for good words from him. But let's be honest about it. If they do fold, it will only be because of the pressure of members of the Labor Party and Independents and the huge community opposition to this project. That is what has delivered this opposition. That is what has delivered this campaign. That is why we are even debating this bill. I have never seen a project more opposed to by the entire community than this project. If the government does fold, if the government does surrender, that will be great. I will certainly appreciate that.

I congratulate every Labor member of parliament who has been involved in this campaign—and some of them are behind me—the member for Newcastle, the member for Paterson, the member for Dobell, the member for Kingsford Smith and the leader of the Labor Party, Anthony Albanese, who said, 'If this project is still going ahead when Labor is in government, we will kill it.' I cede the remaining five minutes of my time to the member for Dobell.

Alex Hawke (Mitchell, Liberal Party, Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government will oppose the suspension of standing orders, for the following reasons. Obviously we have many members here, and I've got two of my colleagues here, the member for Robertson and the member for Mackellar, who are going to speak about their serious concern about and opposition to this. There is concern about an individual project from local communities on the North Shore of Sydney and the Central Coast among members here, and the member for Warringah as well. It's quite appropriate that that be discussed and be the subject of representations to government—and it has been. But I say to the member for Warringah: if you're serious about legislating and if you are serious about doing something or changing a law, it would be incumbent upon you to go to other affected communities and local members on the North Shore. This isn't a political matter; this is a community matter, an environmental matter, and you're not in a political party, as we understand. What you should do is approach the member for Mackellar and the member for Robertson and discuss your concerns with them and seek to get some consensus about what you might want to do.

So, for today, of course the government won't proceed with the proposal by the member for Warringah to suspend standing orders. That doesn't mean that this important conversation can't continue. It will. In fact, the advocacy from the member for Mackellar and the member for Robertson is very strong. And we've heard a very significant statement of intent from the Prime Minister—the strongest statement you could get on a matter such as this—which gives the community that certainty that members here are seeking.

In balancing our environmental commitments, while protecting our marine environment and communities on coasts , we also have to recognise that we have offshore petroleum interests across the country which create jobs and wealth. They help local communities in many parts of our country. All governments have to strike balances between these things. It's appropriate for this conversation to continue. It's appropriate for us to legally look at those questions and at what can be done within the frameworks of the law. The government will continue to balance those things. It will continue to work with communities across Australia. By using activism to do something in a hasty way such as the member for Warringah is proposing today—these things can have consequences for the sovereign investment framework for Australia, for the stability of our investment profile for very important projects that we might want to continue, all around Australia, that are appropriate for those communities, that are environmentally welcomed and that are safe.

The government's got a very strong statement of intention here. The Prime Minister couldn't have been more clear. The member for Mackellar is very clear about his community, and the member for Robertson is very clear about hers, as is the member for Shortland. There is more to discuss. But I say to the member for Warringah—and I have spoken to the minister—do seek a meeting with the minister and discuss it with him if you have these concerns. Go to your local neighbours and friends in the North Shore communities. This isn't just an issue that affects the community of Warringah; it effects the entire coastline of Sydney. I do think there's a time for you to have a collegiate approach on this.

So, the government doesn't support the suspension of standing orders. I look forward to the contributions of the member for Robertson and obviously the member for Mackellar, and the government welcomes the ongoing assessment of these processes and the statement of intent that the government's put forward.

Emma McBride (Dobell, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Mental Health) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My community on the Central Coast of New South Wales is against PEP-11. People living up and down the coast, from Newcastle to Sydney, and across Australia are against PEP-11. Yet Minister Pitt still hasn't made a decision—eight months after his original deadline—and today we're told not to be hasty, and the government is gagging debate. This is a project that will devastate our coastline, our local marine life and our local economy. That's why I stand against PEP-11. That's why all my colleagues on this side of the House stand against PEP-11.

Last year, with colleagues and with members of the government as well, we met with the Surfrider Foundation to save our coast on the lawns of Parliament House, calling on this government to stop PEP-11. In February I stood with my Labor colleagues, many of whom are in the House today—the member for Newcastle, the member for Kingsford Smith, the member for Paterson and all of my colleagues up and down the coast. We stood together with Labor leader Anthony Albanese as we announced Labor's united opposition to PEP-11. In April, with Liesel Tesch, the state member for Gosford, I joined the Surfrider Foundation to save our coast, paddling out against PEP-11, with Ace Buchan, international surfing champion.

Then in August I joined a virtual town hall with advocacy groups to reaffirm my opposition to PEP-11. And I'm not the only one. In my community over 1,800 people have signed a petition to stop PEP-11 and thousands more from Newcastle, Sydney and across Australia. We know Save Our Coast has collected 77,000 signatures to stop this flawed project and this risky plan to drill for fossil fuels within PEP-11.

The opposition is across the community. Glen from Bateau Bay wrote to me: 'I have been able to raise my children here on the Central Coast, passing onto them a love for our ocean, coastline and marine life. The excitement of dolphins swimming close to them, their looks of amazement at the sight of whales fully breaching, still gives me a feeling of happiness.' Kathy from Berkeley Vale said, 'The beach is our happy place. We moved up from Sydney a few years ago and have a quieter and more relaxed life here on the coast. We love it here. For our family of five we love going to the beach. It's our way to reset.' She has echoed the views of hundreds of locals across the Central Coast.

According to the Environmental Defenders Office the PEP-11 project could see drilling commence in a world renowned whale migration route and dolphin habitat, risking devastating the marine ecosystem and exposing locals from Newcastle to Manly to the Central Coast to the prospect of petroleum spills or gas rigs just kilometres from the coastline. Locals are acutely aware of this risk. Even Ben & Jerry's have spoken against this project, making it clear they do not want this project to go ahead.

The minister has still not made a decision. The New South Wales government is opposed to PEP-11. They declared this earlier this year. The New South Wales government said they were opposed to PEP-11. As part of the joint authority Minister Pitt can make this decision with a stroke of a pen today and he's failing to do so. Minister Pitt could do this with a stroke of a pen today but he still hasn't made a decision. And now we're being told by the government that this is too hasty, that we're trying to move too quickly. This is why they're suspending debate today—more than a decade and opposition up and down the coast. This will devastate our communities, our marine life and our way of life. We're told that this is hasty, that we're moving too quickly. Do you know what the government has? A complete lack of urgency. There's a complete lack of urgency from the government. Either they don't get it or they don't care.

Members opposite can stand and speak in support of the private members' bill today but do you know what they could do? They could advocate strongly in their caucus. They could advocate for the government to make a decision today. They could call on Minister Pitt to do the right thing by our community, to do the right thing by our environment, to do the right thing by our economy and make this decision today. Members opposite, speak today, but I urge you, do the right thing. Don't say one thing in your electorate and another thing in this House. Do the right thing by our community. Make Minister Pitt make the decision that our community needs and deserves and is long overdue. You can speak up in this House and you can say another thing in your electorate. You need to do the right thing on PEP-11 for all of us and call on the minister to make a decision today. This is with the stroke of a pen. We don't need this private members' bill—although we fully support it because the government won't act. Now we're preparing for this push and we will vote for this if we get the chance to vote for it but the minister said they won't. It will be suspended. We won't get the opportunity. We will support a private members' bill to stop PEP-11. I am prepared to support this bill and so are my colleagues. But you've already adjourned the debate and now you are suspending standing orders, that's why I am urging the minister to put an end to the uncertainty for my community. He has the power to stop PEP-11 with the stroke of a pen today. Do what's right, minister. This has dragged on for too long.

Lucy Wicks (Robertson, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In rising to speak against the suspension of standing orders, I firstly want to say very loudly that I remain firmly opposed to PEP-11. However, the member for Warringah's motion, supported by members of the opposition, this morning to suspend standing orders is not the best way to achieve this outcome that they seek. Indeed, it only adds to the cacophony of confusion and misinformation that has been surrounding this issue and we all know there has been plenty of that. My colleague the minister for immigration is absolutely right. This is a community issue. It is not a political issue. Let's all work together to achieve the outcome that so many of us support.

This permit has been around for five decades, and it's been a long-running issue for communities from Manly through to the Central Coast and right up to Newcastle. Our community on the Central Coast is a sea based community, and our local beaches and our oceans are part of our way of life. That's why the Central Coast is so firmly opposed to anything that could harm our beaches or waterways, as the member for Dobell said. Our Central Coast community has spoken very loudly, and I have consulted with a wide range of local action groups. I've received countless emails, letters and messages from thousands of local residents and I joined with hundreds of them, including the member for Dobell, at a protest rally of a paddle-out at Terrigal Haven. But, as I would remind the member for Dobell, this is not a political issue; this is a community issue.

I have taken these concerns directly to the minister for resources. I have taken them directly to the Prime Minister, and the message that I got back from the Prime Minister was loud and clear—and the member for Shortland referred to it: 'Under a Morrison government, PEP-11 will not go ahead. That is a rock-solid guarantee.' That is why the motion before the House this morning really achieves nothing for communities up and down the New South Wales coast. The Prime Minister has said he thinks the right decision is to oppose the extension of the PEP-11 licence. He's clear on what his view is. I am clear on what my view is and our what our community's view is. Under a Morrison government, PEP-11 will not go ahead.

Although I acknowledge the member for Warringah's interest in PEP-11 and the support of the opposition for this motion, the decision by the Prime Minister of Australia is resolute. This issue is too important to our region to get wrong. The Prime Minister has said no to PEP-11, my community has said no to PEP-11 and I'm saying no to PEP-11. But I would remind the member for Warringah and members opposite that the best way to achieve the outcome that all of you and indeed many of us in this chamber seek is through the proper processes of government, not political stunts.

Matt Thistlethwaite (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for the Republic) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I support the motion to suspend standing orders moved by the member for Warringah, so as to debate her bill and to vote on it to kill PEP-11. This parliament can kill PEP-11 today, and we should. Petroleum export permit 11 would grant Advent Energy the option to continue to explore for gas and oil off the coast of New South Wales, all the way from the Mid North Coast to the Newcastle region. It's a ridiculous proposal. It would have a detrimental effect on our environment, and, when the economy is beginning to open again, we're potentially going to kill one of the great benefits to the New South Wales economy, our tourism industry and all of the jobs that are created by tourism. The whale migration highway is up and down this coast, and a proposal like this would absolutely destroy that region's tourism industry, which is so important for Australia. It's environmental vandalism at its worst and it should be put to bed today.

The parliament has the opportunity to put it to bed. How long do we have to debate this issue? The permit expired well over 10 months ago, so the government should have made a decision on this permit by now. But the minister, Mr Pitt, won't make a decision. The member for Warringah's bill says the people of Australia want a decision made, and they want that decision made now. This parliament has the opportunity to do that now, so we don't need weasel words from the member for Robertson, the member for Mackellar, the member for Wentworth and the minister. They're trying to get out of this by saying, 'Well, we don't support PEP-11 and we also want to kill it.' We have got the opportunity, so let's do it today. Let's finish this debate and move on to debating the member for Warringah's bill and killing PEP-11 once and for all.

Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Greens support this move from the member for Warringah. The Greens oppose PEP-11. We're in a climate crisis. Everyone—from the United Nations to Joe Biden, Boris Johnson and the conservative International Energy Agency—has said there is no room for new coal, oil and gas projects. On climate grounds alone we should stop the expansion of new fossil fuel projects because we're going to end up with stranded infrastructure when the rest of the world shifts to a zero-pollution economy. As has been pointed out by our New South Wales senator, Mehreen Faruqi, who has worked side by side with the very strong community, which is speaking very loudly, we are going to damage some of the most pristine and valuable area of our coast. Senator Peter Whish-Wilson, our spokesperson for healthy oceans who has also been part of this campaign, has made the point that the damage that is going to be done to oceans is significant, not just from the drilling but also from the seismic testing. We've seen that in areas around Tasmania. So if we're concerned about our climate, about our oceans and about all the people whose livelihood is dependent on healthy oceans and a beautiful coastline, then we must stop PEP-11.

The government should support this. There's no reason for the government to oppose this. Politicians giving weasel words, saying, 'Oh, we're going to stop it,' but then not actually stopping it is part of the reason that communities have so much distrust in politics in the first place. The government comes here and says this is a community issue—well, the community has spoken loud and clear and said, 'Stop PEP-11.' I say to all those Liberal MPs who are saying, 'Don't proceed with action in parliament because it's a community issue,' that the community have spoken. They're after the government to do something very simple, that the government can do and that is within its power to do, which is to say it is not going to proceed and it is going to make that law, make it legally binding. Until the government does, people are right to be suspicious. People are right to say, 'Why do the Prime Minister and the local member say one thing but then refuse to put it into law?'

If the government is not going to do it, then the parliament should. That's why we support the member for Warringah's suspension motion today. It is putting into law what the community is asking. I hope that the government supports this today. The Greens will be proceeding with our bill in the Senate to stop offshore oil and gas drilling because that is what we need to do. I welcome the broad range of support for this motion today, and I hope it translates into other areas, like stopping the fracking of the Beetaloo and stopping new coal, oil and gas projects elsewhere. That would be only logical. But right here, today, the Greens throw our support behind this move. We will continue to fight side by side with the community. Now the government has the chance to not just have the odd member say something or even have the odd member cross the floor. It has the chance to stop PEP-11. And if the government are not going to do it, the parliament should make them.

Jason Falinski (Mackellar, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I stand here today as someone who is implacably opposed to PEP-11 and offshore drilling off the coast of Sydney, Newcastle and elsewhere. Late last year I moved a motion in this chamber calling on the government to do that. I was supported at that time by the member for Robertson, the member for Wentworth and the member for North Sydney. It is important to note that since that time the New South Wales government, a joint signatory to the joint authority, has come out opposed to this project. It is important to note that since that time the Prime Minister went to the Central Coast—more than Anthony Albanese has ever done or the member for wherever—

Hon. Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Mackellar will ignore the interjections because they're about to stop.

Jason Falinski (Mackellar, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He said to the communities that he was opposed to this licence. Why I am opposed to us suspending the standing orders and bringing on a debate on the Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Stopping PEP11) Bill 2021 is that there has been no consultation with this side of the parliament over this. I have a note—

Honourable members interjecting—

The opposition leader may be interested in this, because I know he doesn't mind spending other people's money on things. I have a note from a constitutional lawyer in the Parliamentary Library that says that, if we pass this bill, it opens the taxpayers of Australia to a claim on just terms to potentially hundreds of millions of dollars to Advent Energy. I'm surprised those opposite are suddenly in favour of subsidising fossil fuel companies to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.

Now, do I want Minister Pitt to have made a decision not today but yesterday on this? Absolutely. This has dragged on too long. Let us not forget how all this started. This all started when the Carr Labor government in New South Wales decided to grant a licence to fossil fuel companies to poke, prod and blast the oceans off Newcastle with sonar and disturb the sea life in those areas for 25 years. That has happened. The Labor Party did that, not the Liberal Party. Now at the end of it, when we are trying to clean up the mess that they created, they now want to bring a bill to this parliament, without due process, without looking at it, without people examining the impacts of it, potentially opening the taxpayers of Australia to a compensation claim of hundreds of millions of dollars because they can't even be bothered consulting with us, they can't be bothered reading it and they can't be bothered taking advice on it. What would we expect from the Labor Party? They can't work with anyone to get anything done.

I'm surprised that the member for Melbourne, who apparently is the Leader of the Greens, now wants to give hundreds of millions of dollars to fossil fuel companies. Instead of working through the process—which I concur has taken far too long for Minister Pitt to reach a decision, but such is the nature of NOPSEMA and these regulatory authorities. At least he's going through the process and he is not seeking to use other people's money to compensate energy companies that should never have been given by the Labor Party in New South Wales a licence worth hundreds of millions of dollars. As they go through the process of trying to prove that, after 25 years of looking for gas and oil where there is no gas and oil, they should continue to hold this licence for no good reason, it is just extraordinary.

For this to occur just as we are getting to the end of the process reminds me of the old Chinese proverb that it's like the rooster trying to take credit for the sun coming up. We have gone through this process. We have diligently worked our way through it. I'm opposed to PEP-11. I'm opposed to the environmental damage it could do. I have stood up in this parliament. I have taken on my own government over this. I have fronted Keith Pitt and told him that a decision needs to be made. However, I don't see that on the other side. All I see is political stunts that never seem to know any end.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What an extraordinary contribution from a government member. You would think that he was in no position to actually make a decision. This is a decision of this government. The New South Wales government have come out with a good position on PEP-11. Those opposite, including Keith Pitt, the minister, are in a position to rule this out today, to make a decision today, which would be not as good as making a decision yesterday, not nearly as good as making a decision last month and nowhere near as good as making a decision last year, but at least it would be a decision.

The fact is that I've travelled up with the member for Dobell. We stood at Terrigal and made it very clear that we were opposed to PEP-11. That was a process that went through our processes of shadow cabinet and through our caucus unanimously because this is a bad proposal. It is no wonder that the member for Warringah now sits on the crossbench rather than as a Liberal Party member; the truth is that the people of the northern beaches have been abandoned by this government. The people of the Central Coast have been abandoned by this government. The people of Newcastle and the Hunter have been abandoned by this government. The people of Sydney around the Kingsford Smith and, indeed, Wentworth electorates have been abandoned by this government as well.

Keith Pitt, of course, has given various interviews where he has said that there is a whole lot of investment, that investment comes from shareholders, and therefore we need to take that into account. The PEP-11 proposal is for offshore drilling off some of the most pristine beaches in the most densely populated communities of our nation. The idea that you would have oil drilling off those beaches, be it Manly, Maroubra, Bondi, Terrigal, Avoca or Newcastle's Merewether Beach, is an extraordinary proposition. This is a complete no-brainer. But from a government led by a man whose attitude towards the environment is one of ridiculing renewable energy, ridiculing electric vehicles—ridiculing anything to do with protecting the pristine natural environment in this country by taking action on climate change and other environmental issues—it's not surprising. It's not surprising that we have in the position of Minister for Resources and Water a man who never sees anything he doesn't want to dig up. So, rather than having a strong environmental position to balance up the need for extraction of resources against protection of our natural environment, what we have from this government is a let-it-rip approach that has complete disregard for these issues.

It's interesting that the member for Mackellar, in his rather bizarre contribution here today, spoken as if he really had no influence over the government, spoke about his lobbying of Minister Pitt. He didn't speak about his lobbying of the Minister for the Environment—no, not a word. The environment minister just sits there, does nothing, doesn't take any action, doesn't take environmental protection seriously at all. It's no wonder that the member for Mackellar is under siege from local community organisations in his own electorate, because he's shown himself to be impotent. He was okay at taking action to remove the former member for Mackellar from this parliament—and I say to the member for Mackellar that I congratulate him on that effort—but since he arrived here he hasn't troubled the scorers.

We all have responsibility for our electorates. There was a proposal a few years ago for coal seam gas drilling in St Peters, in my electorate—a rather interesting proposition that was put forward!—and I joined with the community in opposing that proposal because it simply wasn't appropriate. There is a role for resources extraction in this country, but let me just say this as well: the resources sector is undermined as a whole by proposals like this. This damages the resource sector's reputation. That is why legitimate resource businesses are horrified by this proposal, because they all get tarred with this brush. The resources sector is very important for employment.

We have a proposition before this parliament for the suspension of standing orders, which the member for Mackellar has said he's going to vote against. Let's be clear about what he's voting against if he votes against this proposition: he's voting against the member for Warringah having a debate on her bill. He's not voting against the bill; he's voting against the bill being debated and determined by this parliament.

This is a parliament that used to be able to debate issues. We used to have suspensions of standing orders. Leave used to be granted to have discussion. I've sat in this parliament, under the Howard government as well as under the Rudd government and under the Gillard government, and had debates about private members' bills. I've moved private members' bills in this parliament. We have had debates about significant issues, both here and in the Federation Chamber, and had those issues determined by the parliament. That's called democracy. The way this government approaches these issues is just to shut down debate. It's only because this motion's been moved by an independent member that I've been able to contribute to this debate, which is why I didn't want to miss the opportunity to make a contribution consistent with my stance on this issue.

To be very clear: this is a suspension of standing orders to allow the member for Warringah to have a debate about an issue which, quite clearly, is of interest to a range of members in this House, not least of which are the member for Shortland, the member for Dobell, the member for Newcastle and the member for Kingsford Smith, as well as the member for Mackellar, the member for Robertson, the member for Melbourne and the member for Warringah. It seems to me to be quite extraordinary that you would not then have a debate allowed, which is why this suspension should just go through on the voices if those opposite are fair dinkum at all. But, if the member for Mackellar and the member for North Sydney and the member for Robertson vote against this motion, let me tell you, it won't just be the member for Warringah telling her constituents about it; it will be others as well.

This PEP-11 project should be consigned to the dustbin of history, where it belongs. Here we have a government that has been in office until towards the end of its third term. They're in pre-caretaker mode already, struggling as they are to get to 2022 as they fall apart, with chaos on the opposite over climate change. They've got a conference in 10 days time, and they don't have a government position, as of today, on net zero by 2050. It is just extraordinary. They don't have a position on this either, and this is not a big call. This is a complete no-brainer. Minister Pitt could make a decision immediately which would mean that the member for Warringah wouldn't have to proceed with her bill, and that's the preferred action. The minister should just do his job and say no to this proposal.

Alex Hawke (Mitchell, Liberal Party, Minister for Immigration, Citizenship, Migrant Services and Multicultural Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the question be now put.

Question agreed to.

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the motion be disagreed to.

Question agreed to.