Perin Davey (NSW, National Party, Shadow Minister for Water) Share this | Hansard source

When you were in opposition—thank you, Senator Watt—it was certainly better times, and certainly a more transparent time. But they finally got shamed into setting up the inquiry. However, it had the weakest of all terms of reference, designed to avoid scrutiny. Ironically, it was not even scrutiny of themselves. It would have provided scrutiny of a Liberal-National government, but they limited the terms of reference to protect their state mates and avoid scrutiny of their state mates. Caught out, embarrassed and shamed, they've back-pedalled to slightly expand the terms of reference. But let me make it clear that the terms still explicitly exclude the decisions of state and territory governments from being investigated by the inquiry, and that's something that clearly wasn't explained down the chain of command, because, shockingly, the minister for health, Mr Butler, incorrectly stated this morning that the terms of reference explicitly included examination of those health responses. It was wrong. It was incorrect. The health minister even went on to say that it would be extraordinary to set up an inquiry that did not examine the operation of those measures, not realising that that's exactly what his government did—not just once but twice—when they expanded the terms of reference. We saw another example just today, when, in question time, I asked a question of the Minister representing the Minister for the Environment and Water, Minister Watt. He got up to answer the question but could not answer in any coherent way.

He did not know the detail, which is something that is becoming common among this government. It was very clear that the minister did not know or care what impacts the government's policies would have on communities, which is again what we're seeing with their avoidance of this inquiry. And the list goes on and on.

Time and time again we are seeing this government avoid orders of the Senate for the production of documents, and I am not alone in my concerns of that. We've seen representatives from the Greens and representatives from the crossbench call this government to account for failing to produce documents required by this chamber to allow us to do our jobs effectively. We all are calling for transparency, which is why I'm so astounded that the Greens persist in blocking this inquiry with the government.

Let me make it clear: our call for an inquiry isn't just about farmers. Transmission lines, the impacts of transmission lines, the costs of transmission lines—the cost will affect everyone—and the impact of building and constructing those transmission lines, will, yes, impact farmers, but it will also impact our landscapes, flora, fauna and amenity. Indeed, when the New South Wales parliament held an inquiry into this issue, they heard from the Animal Justice Party NSW. That's not a party I am normally prone to agree with, but on this occasion they highlighted the damage that transmission lines could have on 82 species of plants and animals in New South Wales alone. That inquiry heard from environmental activists, national parks representatives, landholders and community members who all raised significant concerns about the transmission lines, how routes are chosen, compensation offered and the impacts on their lives and livelihoods.

We know that these lines will impact on koala habitat. We know that the transmission lines require vast swathes of landscape to be cleared. We know that there are concerns about bushfire risks. We've seen reports in the West Australian and other newspapers about volunteer firefighters raising their concerns about the impact of transmission lines and the increased risk of bushfires but also about how to then respond to bushfires: the impact of transmission lines on the capability for aerial firefighting services and the impact of transmission lines on the capability of using other infrastructure and other equipment in and around transmission lines if bushfires occur. I don't understand the logic of those opposite who claim that they want to save the planet but are happy to destroy Australia's environment to do so.

We have brought on this debate time and time again, and we haven't won the vote, obviously, to get an inquiry. There are ever-increasing numbers of people also raising concerns about this issue. Since we commenced our campaign to hold an inquiry, just an inquiry, into transmission lines, we've also seen an increase in protests against renewable projects. I bet the government kind of wishes they'd accepted our proposal for a simple inquiry into transmission lines at the outset, at the beginning of this process, because that might have helped them actually quell what is now becoming an increasing issue for the government.

From Bob Brown and the eagle campaigners in Tasmania to the offshore flotillas of surfers going out from both Wollongong and Newcastle to protest against offshore wind farms, people who are not necessarily conservative, who are certainly not climate deniers or climate change sceptics—in fact, they are some of the most vocal proponents of the need to do something to address climate change—are the very people protesting against renewable projects, and they also have concerns about transmission lines. This is why we need to actually listen. This is why we need an inquiry. I will agree with Senator Babet. We also need to ask the question why are we continually blocking talking about nuclear? But I stray.

This motion is about an inquiry into the impact of transmission lines, how those decisions are made, how the routes are chosen, how communities and landholders are consulted with to bring them on the journey, because it has been appalling so far. Imagine getting home and finding a waterproof envelope stuck to your front door saying 'Your home has been chosen for destruction so we can put in a power pole.' That is effectively what is happening to farmers. They come home to an envelope on their gate saying, 'Lucky You. You have drawn out of the lottery and you are going to have transmission lines criss-crossing your property whether or not you like it.' So is it any wonder with this government's track record that you have even people like a brand-new president of the NFF calling out the Albanese government on their lack of consultation, on their lack of preparedness to work with farmers, landholders and regional communities to develop policy that will actually benefit Australia.

In closing, I will just say: get on board. Let us have this inquiry then you won't have to listen to us every other Tuesday talking about it again and again. Let us have the inquiry. Let us hear from the people who want to be heard and stop avoiding scrutiny and transparency.