Ricky Muir (Victoria, Australian Motoring Enthusiast Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Veterans' Affairs, representing the Minister for Industry and Science, Senator Ronaldson. Recently, the Australian government announced that it would reinstate native forest wood waste as a feedstock for the renewable biomass as part of the renewable energy target. I note that today the Australian Labor Party has confirmed that it would oppose this move. I understand that this feedstock will be waste material such as tree branches, sawdust and timber offcuts from sustainable forest harvesting and processing operations. Can the minister confirm that this is the case?

Michael Ronaldson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Minister for Veterans’ Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Muir for his question and for some earlier notice about it. I can confirm that situation. The use of native forest wood for the sole or primary purpose of generating renewable electricity has never been eligible to create certificates under the RET scheme. And that will remain. But as he quite rightly suggests, offcuts, sawdust, tree branches—essentially by-products of forestry projects—are what is used to generate renewable electricity. Indeed, wood waste was included in Labor's original legislation, but they decided to remove it from the scheme in 2011. And I will have a bit more to say about that soon. In a dirty deal done with their Greens colleagues, they preferred to see the wood waste lie on the ground and rot—which, coincidentally, produces more carbon dioxide than if the waste is used for a useful purpose. In 2012, Labor's own Climate Change Authority recommended that wood waste be reinstated as an eligible form of electricity generation.

This government has consistently raised this issue at the negotiating table over the last 12 months. This is not a last-minute addition. It is a matter that the coalition has been discussing for years—indeed, since Labor removed wood waste from the scheme in 2011.

Ricky Muir (Victoria, Australian Motoring Enthusiast Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. It has been claimed—which I have just heard—that including native wood waste as part of the renewable energy target will threaten native forests. Can the minister please inform the Senate of what sort of safeguards will exist if native forest wood waste is included in the RET to ensure that native forests are not harvested for the sole purpose of bioenergy production.

Michael Ronaldson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Minister for Veterans’ Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am not surprised that what you were told by the Left has filled you with horror because it fills me with horror every time I hear them speak. The government intends to use the same legislation that was in place under the original bipartisan RET deal, before Labor and the Greens removed it in 2011. This legislation requires that the wood waste must be the by-product of a harvesting operation based on ecological sustainable forest management principles. As was the case before Labor and the Greens did their dirty deal, the principles that define ecological sustainable forest management practices will be clearly outlined in the regulations for everyone to see.

Ricky Muir (Victoria, Australian Motoring Enthusiast Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. The renewable energy industry has faced enough uncertainty in recent times. Despite reaching an in-principle agreement with the opposition, the announcement by the government that it will conduct two-yearly reviews has revived this uncertainty. Can the minister confirm whether the government would proceed with two-yearly reviews of the renewable energy target or whether it will consider conducting its first review in 2020 in order to provide some real certainty to the sector?

Michael Ronaldson (Victoria, Liberal Party, Minister for Veterans’ Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Muir again. Clearly, the Labor Party say they want to do a deal but, when push comes to shove, they are not prepared to do so. Labor, with the help of the Greens, set up the Climate Change Authority and two-yearly reviews. It is Labor's review; it is Labor's Climate Change Authority. We believe the two-yearly review must be maintained to protect consumers. As the Senate is well aware, the Australian government is committed to a RET that allows sustainable growth from both small- and large-scale renewable energy. We have come to an agreement with Labor in good faith in relation to the gigawatt hours, but the government believes that if the target is not met because it is set too high households and business will have to pay for this failure via a penalty price on renewable energy certificates. That would mean an increase to electricity bills similar to the carbon tax. If the renewable energy industry is on track to meet the target, then the review will show this and nothing will change. But if the price of certificates is heading towards the penalty then customer should not be paying. (Time expired)