Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I'm speechless. It would be very, very hard to beat that. If I had had Senator Rennick teaching physics at my high school in grade 10, I would've done physics in senior. I did interject during Senator Rennick's speech. Senator Brockman is here. As he knows and as you know, all interjections are disorderly. When Senator Rennick was counting off the different laws of physics, I yelled out 'Boyle's law', which, of course, was correct. But, Senator Rennick, I must admit that Boyle's law is the only law of physics I'm aware of, so it was a stab in the dark.

I must say I also was reflecting on the laws of physics. I did make a promise to my friend Senator Cadell here and I've come up with Scarr's law of political physics. This is based on personal observation—observation of myself, not of anyone else; simply of myself. Scarr's first law—I might come up with some more!—of political physics is: a politician's words expand to fill the time available. How's that? That's Scarr's law of political physics. I thought that was pretty good. I'll come up with some other laws over the course of my career, hopefully! But I did enjoy Senator Rennick's contribution.

I have 77 pages in my hand, which is the Community engagement review undertaken by Mr Dyer and tabled on 18 December 2023, which supports this motion to set up a references committee inquiry in relation to transmission systems in our regional and rural communities. That is 77 pages of a report which makes it irrefutable that there should be this references committee. I serve as chair of a references committee, the Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee, and the Senate refers various matters to the committee that I chair—matters of interest to senators in this place and matters of interest to the community. From my perspective, this is a matter of intense interest to the community and this is a matter that should be referred to a references committee, and I cannot see any logical reason as to why it is not accepted for referral by a majority of the senators in this place. The only reason is political—that certain senators do not want this to go to a references committee and do not want to hear directly from the people who are impacted by these projects in regional and rural Australia.

I want to quote from Mr Dyer's Community engagement review. And I ask all senators in this place—every one of us should actually read this review document. Even if you're voting against this resolution, please read this document. Please read the feedback from local, regional and rural communities all across this country, because it's shocking. These are shocking findings—absolutely shocking findings. If you read no other page, simply go to page 8 of this report and read these statistics, the results of the surveys of landholders and community members about their experience of engagement on renewable energy projects. These are landholders and community members, the people most directly impacted by these matters.

Thank you, Senator Cadell, exactly—the people who would be able to speak at this hearing and give evidence to this references committee.

And these are shocking survey results. The percentage of respondents who were dissatisfied with the extent to which project developers engaged with the local community—what percentage do you think that is? It's 92 per cent; 92 per cent of respondents were dissatisfied with that level of engagement. The percentage of respondents dissatisfied with the explanations provided by project developers in response to their questions—these are community members raising legitimate questions—is 85 per cent. This is on page 8 of this report. The percentage of respondents who stated that the information they received from project developers was not relevant to the concerns that they raised—and we in this place are all accustomed to that; getting an answer to a question you never asked—was 89 per cent. That's nearly nine in 10. And the percentage of respondents who stated that their concerns were not addressed in a timely manner was 85 per cent.

Those are compelling results from the survey. It is for those people, the people who responded to this survey—community members in rural and regional communities—that we should have this reference inquiry. Their responses are the reason. I cannot for the life of me understand how you can stand in the way of a references committee inquiry given those responses.

Another survey in this report also leapt out to me and was deeply concerning. Listen to this: the percentage of community members who believe the local community would benefit from large-scale community projects put in their community is nine per cent—that's nine per cent or fewer than one in 10. Five per cent strongly agree, four per cent agree—that's fewer than one in 10 of those community members who are impacted by the policies made by the Commonwealth government and the state government with respect to these large renewable energy projects. Only nine per cent of local community members think the community will actually benefit from them, and you don't want to have an inquiry? When you are faced with the survey results, you don't want to have an inquiry? Seriously? Seventy-one per cent strongly disagree that their community will benefit. More than seven in 10 strongly disagree, and if you add 'disagree' the figure goes up to 83 per cent. Eighty-three per cent of the community members do not believe that their communities will benefit from these projects. In the face of those statistics, seriously, you don't want to have an inquiry?

In my first speech in this place, I talked about the need to make sure communities impacted by policies made in this place should be consulted in relation to those policies, whether they're mining projects or renewable energy projects. Whatever sorts of projects they are, it is one thing for this place to pass policies and impose the outcomes of those policy decisions on local communities, but if we're going to do that then those local communities should have opportunities. The local communities in Queensland who are impacted by these large-scale renewable energy projects have a right to have their voices heard. It is a travesty that Labor and the Greens are blocking community members in Queensland from having the right to have their voices heard in relation to these large-scale renewable energy projects being constructed and proposed in their local communities.

Seventy-one per cent strongly disagree that their local communities are going to get benefit from these projects. Through you, Mr Acting Deputy President, I really do say to those sitting opposite—to the Greens and the rest of the crossbench—you should really reflect upon whether or not you want to continue standing in the way of the establishment of this references committee inquiry. The results of this community engagement review, which were referred to last year on one of the previous eight or nine occasions—is it nine occasions, Senator Cadell?