Christine Milne (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I move Greens amendments (3) and (4):

(3)    Heading to Part 3, page 6 (line 2), at the end of the heading, add “energy use threshold”.

R(4) Clause 10, page 6 (lines 26 to 28), omit subclause (1), substitute:

        (1)    The energy use threshold will be prescribed by the regulations.

     (1A)    The regulations must set a sliding scale for the energy use threshold of a minimum of 0.5 petajoules for a controlling corporation’s group for each financial year commencing in the 2006-2007 financial year reducing annually to a minimum of 0.2 petajoules for a controlling corporation’s group by the financial year 2011-2012.

      (1B)    A controlling corporation’s group meets the energy use threshold for a financial year if in that year the total energy used by the controlling corporation’s group is more than the energy use threshold nominated for the relevant financial year as prescribed by subsection (1A).

As the bill is currently structured, the energy use threshold relates to companies that use more than 0.5 petajoules of energy, thereby restricting the bill’s capacity to draw in all of Australia’s small and medium scale businesses. At the moment the bill deals with Australia’s largest 250 companies. I think it is entirely appropriate that we target the largest companies to begin with, but we also want medium sized companies to look to energy efficiency as a way of becoming more competitive, reducing their costs, contributing to Australia’s reduced greenhouse gases and contributing to reduced pressure to build new supply.

What I am proposing with these amendments is that, instead of just leaving this bill to capture the largest companies in Australia, the threshold be reduced over a period of time so that by the year 2011-12 it would apply to companies using more than 0.2 petajoules. At the moment the bill is saying, ‘Okay, we recognise it is just going with the largest 250 companies.’ By having a sliding scale so that the threshold reduces over time, we are giving notice to medium-sized companies in Australia—those that use between 0.2 and 0.5 petajoules—that, over a period of time, they too will be captured by this legislation. It is really telling corporations that, as we roll into this legislation, they too will be captured by the need to do energy efficiency audits.

Again, this is not saying that the government’s initiative is not worth while; it is saying it is worth while but it does not go far enough because it is not capturing the next level of industry in Australia. I think it is entirely appropriate that middle-sized industries in Australia are on notice that this bill is coming down the track and will apply to them and that they have a period of time to adjust to the idea that they too will be involved in the energy audits. I regret, of course, that the legislation—with my amendment having been defeated—will not require them to implement what they find, but at least having a sliding scale will increase the number of industries across Australia to which the legislation applies. It is a simple notion: a sliding scale, reducing the current threshold of 0.5 petajoules down to 0.2 petajoules.