Nita Green (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I'm very pleased to rise, and I thank the senators for raising this really important issue. I have taken a very keen interest in our energy market as a regional Australian, as a regional Queenslander and as the Special Envoy for the Great Barrier Reef, because I know that taking action on climate change is so important. But I also know that delivering cheaper and cleaner energy is really important for regional Australia. That is why our government have taken a policy to the election and are progressing it to make sure that we can deliver cleaner and cheaper energy.

Unfortunately, after 10 years, those opposite had 22 draft policies but they couldn't land a single one, so they are here today to lecture us about energy policy. After 22 failed goes, they didn't land a single policy but they are here today to lecture us about energy policy. It's really important that Australians know that there are no secrets to Labor's policy. I don't know why those opposite are so opposed to renewable energy. That is a secret to me. I don't understand why they're so against enhancing the natural resources of our country. But we made sure that we took to the election a clear and decisive plan to reduce emissions and get our country to net zero. One of the first acts of our government was to limit our emissions reduction targets. We have also doubled approvals for renewable energy projects, with the sector already supporting thousands of jobs around the country. Speaking of jobs, we are providing clean energy apprenticeships to ensure that we have the skilled workforce that's needed for the thousands of jobs that this sector will create.

When it comes to policies, we know from this motion today that the Liberals and Nationals have a policy of bringing in nuclear power. What we don't know are the details of the policy. We don't know where, we don't know when and we don't know how much. Today on RN breakfast, the shadow minister for energy belled the cat on some of these details. He said that he would be absolutely happy to welcome a nuclear facility to his electorate of Fairfax in Queensland. He couldn't tell presenter how much the policy would cost. We know that there are estimates that it would cost Australian $25,000 each for the $387 billion cost burden that the Liberals' nuclear plan would put on Australians. What they were able to tell us is that when it comes to nuclear facilities, they are happy to have them on Coolum Beach, just down the road from Noosa, and all the way through our Queensland coast. They need to tell us how much it's going to cost, they need to tell us where they're going to put them and they need to tell us when. It's a simple question. If they have a policy, tell us the details. There are no secrets with us but there are secrets on the other side.

Finally, I'll turn to the other issue raised in this motion—and I thank Senator Cadell. COP28 is taking place at the moment. Many senators have a keen interest in COP28, including senators from the Liberal and National parties. Some of them are heading over there. At least 10 members of the opposition have registered to attend—Senator Davey, Senator Kovacic, Senator McKenzie, Senator Smith and Senator Bragg. This is in addition to the member for Fairfax, the member for Page, the member for Bradfield, the member for Lyne and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition. They're all heading over there, but the question I have—and we'll find out in the ordinary course of declarations that are required by members of parliament, but it remains a question—is: who is funding these trips?

One option may be the Coalition for Conservation, and I say this only because we know that this same group sent delegations of coalition MPs and senators to COP26 in Glasgow and COP27 in Egypt.

They've also announced that they'll be sending a delegation to COP28. Is this the group funding these MPs and senators to go to COP28? The Coalition for Conservation is an internal lobby group within the coalition. I tripped over those words as little because they make it clear in their annual report that, unlike other environmental organisations, they have a 'pro-growth' philosophy.

It was actually Senator Van, a member of the COP27 delegation, who said that the role of the group has been to highlight conservative voices. So it's not so much about conservation but about conservative voices in this discussion. It's an interesting group. We know who's going to COP28, we know that previous delegations have been supported by the Coalition for Conservation, but we don't know who is funding the Coalition for Conservation, because their donors are secret. When it comes to the LNP and nuclear power policy, that's all we seem to get. (Time expired)