Henry Pike (Bowman, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. On 4 April this year in Queensland, you looked down the barrel of TV cameras and promised your plan on emission reduction would 'result in energy prices coming down by $275 per household'. Prime Minister, will you look down the barrel of the camera now and admit to the people of Queensland that, instead of your promised $275, your budget locks in an electricity price increase of 56 per cent and a gas price increase of 44 per cent?

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think I'll leave looking down the barrel to 'the lightweight on the hill' over there! I thank the member for his question. I do note the comments of Phil Lowe, the Governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia, someone who has a bit of a role in the economy and someone who has a look at energy policy and the impact. This is what he had to say to the Standing Committee on Economics on 16 September:

… the fact that Australia committed to net zero by 2050 was incredibly important. …The fact that we had not signed up had people saying: 'Are you really serious about this? We want this. Do we want to invest in Australia?' … the fact that we committed to it was important. Australia has great potential here with clean energy. … When we were on a different path, people were saying, 'Are they really serious?' It was damaging us.

And indeed it was, because four gigawatts left the system, and only one gigawatt came in. If you have an impact on that, it has an impact on price. But we are already acting on our policy, which has been passed through both houses of parliament, and, as a result, we're already seeing the investment. You see, price is a product of investment.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Prime Minister will take a break.

Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They're taking a point of order: too much relevance!

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister for Climate Change and Energy, I'm trying to take a point of order from the Manager of Opposition Business.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, it's on relevance. The question was very clear. There was a $275 cut in power prices promised. We've actually seen, you're now saying, a 56 per cent—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Resume your seat. The question was a long question regarding prices of energy. The Prime Minister is directly relevant. He is referring in his answer to the cost of energy, and I give him the call.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm precisely talking about the price of energy, which is very much related to whether there is investment in new energy or not. I know that might be too complex for those opposite, but here's what the chief executive of Neoen, the French group, had to say just this week about the investment in new energy, which will have an impact up to 2030. This is what he had to say about 2025:

We are the largest renewable player in the country and we want to quadruple in size before the end of the decade. We are going to double between now and 2025 and we are going to double again before the end of the decade. … there will be hundreds of jobs coming from these new investments.

…   …   …

… the good thing is that renewable energy is part of the solution.

…   …   …

We have a cost of production that is much lower than other energy sources.

So what we're seeing as a direct result of the policy that we have is more investment, which is, as the chief executive of Neoen said, much lower than other energy sources—something that those opposite don't seem to understand.