Michelle Ananda-Rajah (Higgins, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

():  My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. How is the Albanese Labor government delivering lower energy bills and A Future Made in Australia, by investing in renewable energy? What has been the response to these policies and what energy policies has the government ruled out?

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

I appreciate the question from the member for Higgins. The member for Higgins knows that renewable energy is one of this countries great economic opportunities, as we on this side of the House do. When we see renewable energy we don't run away from it, we're not scared of it, we embrace it as an economic opportunity for our regions in particular. When we see renewable energy we see an opportunity for young people in the regions of Australia—whether it's the Hunter Valley or Central Queensland or Collie in Western Australia—to study and to participate in that revolution and to stay where they grow up if they want to and take those great of the future. That's what we see in this country. Renewable energy means cheaper bills and more jobs for our country.

The Future Made in Australia Bill is all about seizing that opportunity for our nation, and we see that opportunity. We've heard that the opposition is opposed to it and we heard from the shadow Treasurer last night. In rejecting the Future Made in Australia plan the shadow Treasurer pointed to the community benefit principles in the bills, calling them 'Orwellian'. I had a look. I thought that we've got to be fair and we've got to check. He's onto us here. There's some terrible stuff here. 'Promote safe and secure jobs that are well paid and have good conditions.' That's socialism writ large there. 'Develop more skilled and inclusive workforces, including by investing in training and skills development, and broadening opportunities for workforce participation.' We're on the verge of something terrible here. This is really high stakes. 'Engage collaboratively with and achieve outcomes for local communities.' No wonder they're against it. They're opposed to it strengthening 'domestic industrial capabilities including through stronger local supply chains'. That is, a sovereign capability for our country. I mean, this is verging on dictatorship. This is really, really dangerous material. Thank goodness we've got the member for Hume standing there against it.

To be fair to the opposition—as we always try to be—they're dead against it in Canberra but less so in Perth. They're not so opposed to it in Perth. The Leader of the Opposition went to Western Australia last week. To his credit, it's good to be there. It was one of his longer visits to Western Australia, more than a few hours. No billionaire birthdays were attended, to the best of our knowledge. I tell you where else he didn't attend—Collie, which is where the opposition want a nuclear power station. He couldn't find his way to Collie. He was asked on radio, 'Have you been to Collie?' and he said, 'I haven't been up to Collie yet.' Collie is south of Perth, so you go down to Collie. A bit of a 'Yeppen' moment for the Leader of the Opposition while he was in Western Australia. I'm not quite sure where he wants to put the nuclear reactors. He couldn't be bother going there. The Leader of the Opposition has never been to Collie in his life and he wants to put a nuclear reactor there.

During the break I went to Port Augusta, Central Queensland and Lithgow, where the opposition is proposing nuclear power plants. Those communities want jobs and investment today, not in the 2040s. That's what we'll provide. That's what the Leader of the Opposition is not capable of providing. (Time expired)