Tim Ayres (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Trade) Share this | Hansard source

Of course consistency matters. On this matter, who was the environment minister who decided that the carbon capture and storage project referred to in Senator Hansen's motion was not a controlled action? Who was that minister? It wasn't Minister Plibersek. It was Minister Ley in the previous government who decided that that was the case. The truth is that the processes that are allowed under the act mean that there is scope for judicial review of the former minister's decision. Now, I don't know whether this was a period when there were multiple ministers occupying this position, but it was Minister Ley who made that determination. I don't think she's out there issuing press releases, if that's what she did. But it is now before the Federal Court of Australia, and it wouldn't be appropriate to comment further on those proceedings.

In the contribution that I just heard there were claims made about water security in regional areas. The old adage is that members of the National Party, in particular, go around in the lead-up to elections making big claims about the dams that they're going to build and then disappoint their constituents by not delivering. Of course, they point the finger at everybody else.

I remember when Mr Joyce and Mr Abbott wandered around the country in 2013 saying they were going to build 100 dams. Very earnest and serious people, like Senator McGrath, who has been out talking about dams every day of the week, believed them, if I remember his contributions correctly. How many dams did they build? It was not five out of 100, not four out of 100 and not three out of 100. They built two out of 100. If they had built all of the dams that Mr Abbott and Mr Joyce said they would build, the sea level would be lower! It is an absolute hoax that is perpetrated on country communities by the National Party and others claiming that they are going to build infrastructure that they know they are never going to build. They had a decade. They promised country people they would build 100 dams. How many did they build? Two. They ought not be taken seriously on these questions ever again.

We should be clear about how disingenuous the Nationals are on this matter of Glencore. In June 2022 the Leader of the Nationals, Mr Littleproud, whose electorate this project is in, said on the Insiders program, 'Look about 60 kilometres west of where I'm sitting now, and carbon capture and storage has been implemented on a cool-fired power station'—Millmerran—'That's the investment the Morrison government made. It will be interesting to see how the Liberals and Nationals intend to vote on this proposition. It will be interesting to see whether it is Mr Littleproud last year or Mr Littleproud this year. Where are they? Are they for the carbon capture and storage technology that they say is essential to protecting the integrity of all of these projects that Senator McDonald and others wander around the country saying are so important? Are they fer it or are they agin' it?

The truth is they are both. They say one thing on Monday and another thing on Tuesday. On Wednesday it's a whole new ballgame because, in this world of far-right extremism and culture war nonsense, the facts have stopped mattering for them. They stopped mattering quite some time ago. If you can put it in a meme, it matters. That's where the Nationals are.

Now they want to pretend that they have nothing to do with this project that they were on television supporting in 2022, that the government they were part of didn't make decisions that meant that AgForce is out there seeking a judicial review. What is the Liberal and National Party position on this? Less than two years ago, Mr Littleproud was spruiking the project, saying that it protected gas but also protected our coal industry with carbon capture and storage. He was for it. Now, I guess, we'll find out if he is for it or against it.

So desperate is this show over here to try to cobble together a conservative coalition on energy policy that they are for the project and they're against it. No doubt we're about to hear a whole lot of stuff about how a giant nuclear power station in an unspecified place would resolve some of these issues. They won't be, I imagine, in marginal electorates that the Liberal and National parties seek to win at the next election. Whether we are talking about untested, experimental technology, in terms of the small nuclear modular reactors that they keep talking about or the big tens of billions of dollars 'never get done' nuclear reactors, so desperate are they to hold themselves together on energy policy that you end up with stunts like this that once again bring together One Nation, the Nationals and the Liberals on a course of action, resulting in a direction in energy policy that will lead only to higher bills, projects never being built, manufacturing going offshore, higher prices for consumers and higher emissions. Australia will be once again out in the cold in terms of investment and economic activity, reduced to the pariah-state status that Mr Morrison reduced the country to in our region and around the world.

It's the direction that those opposite are taking the show in. It is utter hypocrisy. It's utterly dishonest. It's 'say one thing one day and do another thing the next'. It is a complete betrayal of what that side used to say that they stood for, and the government's voting position on this particular motion will reflect our view of that.