Kimberley Kitching (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to Senator Brandis, the Minister representing the Prime Minister. Can the minister confirm that on various occasions Prime Minister Turnbull has supported each of the following propositions: an emissions trading scheme, a carbon tax, an emissions intensity scheme, a clean energy target and, last but not least, a stronger renewable energy target? Did Mr Turnbull believe in each of these positions as much as he does in today's?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, I can't confirm that. But what I can confirm is that about half an hour ago the Prime Minister and the minister for energy, Mr Frydenberg, announced the Australian government's energy policy, the National Energy Guarantee. This is a game-changing policy. It is implicit in your question, Senator Kitching, that there has been unsettlement and uncertainty in Australian energy policy for a good decade or more. But now, as a result of the announcement that the Turnbull government has made in the last half hour, there no longer is.

The choice could not be more stark than it is. The Australian government has adopted the recommendations of the Energy Security Board—a board of specialists who are better informed about the operation of the Australian energy market than any other group of people in Australia—to adopt a suite of policies which collectively are known as the National Energy Guarantee. As a result of this announcement, the uncertainty that has bedevilled this area of public policy for a decade or more now is a thing of the past. As a result of this policy, we will begin to see electricity prices go down. We will guarantee the reliability of supply, something that the Australian Labor Party, particularly in South Australia, has been unable to do. In the meantime we will stick to our Paris targets as well. This is a win-win-win.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Kitching, a supplementary question.

Kimberley Kitching (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can the minister confirm that, on each occasion, Prime Minister Turnbull has changed his position because former Prime Minister Abbott has won?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can absolutely tell you, Senator Kitching, that that is wrong. The proposition you've asserted is completely wrong. What the government has adopted is a series of recommendations of the Energy Security Board: Kerry Schott, the chair of that board; Clare Savage, the deputy chair; John Pierce, the Chair of the Australian Energy Market Commission; Audrey Zibelman, the Chief Executive Officer of the Australian Energy Market Operator; and Paula Conboy, Chair of the Australian Energy Regulator. Senator Kitching, you would know of some of these men and women. They are the best-informed specialists, the people in Australia with the most intimate knowledge of the Australian energy market, whose appointment, not by this government but by COAG three months ago, was welcomed by your own shadow spokesman, Mr Butler, as excellent.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Kitching, a final supplementary question.

Kimberley Kitching (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Given that former Prime Minister Abbott today criticised the Turnbull government's latest energy policy in the Liberal Party room, how long will Mr Turnbull maintain his latest position?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was in the Liberal Party room, and what you assert is not true. What you assert is simply not true. But what I can tell you is that the government has adopted the recommendations of the Energy Security Board. The package of measures announced by Mr Turnbull and Mr Frydenberg come from that review of the Australian energy market by the men and women best placed to provide expert advice in relation to it. We have adopted their recommendations—in particular, their recommendation of a National Energy Guarantee based upon an emissions guarantee and a reliability guarantee.

So, Senator Kitching, at the next election that will be the choice: higher electricity prices under a Labor government or lower electricity prices under Mr Turnbull's government. (Time expired)

David Bushby (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is also to the Attorney-General, Senator Brandis, representing the Prime Minister. Can the Attorney-General update the Senate on what the Turnbull government is doing to ensure a reliable, stable energy system for Australian families and businesses?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much indeed, Senator Bushby, for a timely question. In response to Senator Kitching I did mention the announcement lately made by the Prime Minister and Mr Frydenberg, but let me give you some more details. As I said to Senator Kitching, based on the advice of the Energy Security Board, it is expected that the National Energy Guarantee will lead to a reduction in the typical household bill of between $110 and $115 per year over the 2020-2030 period. The guarantee is made up of two parts that will require energy retailers across the National Electricity Market to deliver reliable and lower emissions generations each year.

A reliability guarantee will be set to deliver the right level of dispatchable energy from ready-to-use sources such as coal, gas, pumped hydro and batteries needed in each state. It will be set by the Australian Energy Market Commission and the Australian Energy Market Operator. An emissions guarantee will be set to contribute to Australia's international commitments. The level of the guarantee will be determined by the Commonwealth and enforced by the Australian Energy Regulator. The National Energy Guarantee will lower electricity prices, make the system more reliable, encourage investment and reduce emissions without subsidies, taxes or trading schemes. The age of subsidies is over.

This technology-neutral policy based on engineering and economics brings together the best advice from the AEMC, the AEMO and the AER to level the playing field and deliver the best mechanism for our future energy supply.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Bushby, a supplementary question.

David Bushby (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can the Attorney-General apprise the Senate of the importance of a reliable and secure energy supply?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, I can. It's obvious to all of us why it is important that Australia have a reliable, secure and affordable energy supply. It is a fundamental obligation of any government to keep the lights on and to provide its people with power at prices they can afford. And, as a result of the announcements made today by the Prime Minister, that is precisely what we mean to do.

And the comparison with the Australian Labor Party couldn't be more stark—in the state of South Australia, for example, where last year the entire state was blacked out. The entire state of South Australia was blacked out last year as a direct result of the policies of the Weatherill Labor government—because the Weatherill Labor government wasn't committed to economics and to engineering; it was committed to ideology. That's the difference: the Labor Party, driven by ideology, can't even keep the lights on and the Turnbull government has a plan for affordable and reliable supply.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Bushby, a final supplementary question.

David Bushby (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can the Attorney-General outline how the government's national energy plan will ensure that Australian families and businesses benefit from lower power prices?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Bushby; indeed I can. The government understands that households and businesses are doing it tough. We understand that, as the ACCC disclosed yesterday, in the last 10 years there has been a 68 per cent increase in power prices, almost all of it attributable to the doubling of power prices in the six years of the Labor government and, in particular, as a result of its carbon tax.

The government has tackled power bills from every angle: from network to generation to retail costs. We've worked with the companies—in particular, the gas suppliers—to get better regulated markets, more transparency and more competition. Today's announcement is good news for consumers. Based on the advice of the Energy Security Board, the National Energy Guarantee will lead to a reduction in a typical household bill of $110 to $115 per annum, while the Labor Party only wants to force electricity prices up. (Time expired)

Sam Dastyari (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is also to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Brandis. In the lead-up to the 2013 election, the Liberals promised they would reduce power prices by $500 a year. Can the minister confirm that, instead of delivering Australians a saving, the Turnbull government has delivered the highest power prices on record?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Dastyari, that is not the case and, Senator Dastyari—

Opposition Senators:

Opposition senators interjecting—

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

through you, Mr President—in fact, what we saw with the election of the coalition government in 2013 was the sharpest reduction of electricity prices on record, as a direct result of the repeal of the carbon tax. Do you remember the carbon tax, Senator Dastyari? It was the tax that Ms Julia Gillard promised never to introduce, then—on the footing of a false promise made at the 2010 election—did introduce, that caused power prices to undergo their sharpest increase on record, so that, over the six-year period of the Labor government, power prices—the cost to households of electricity—doubled. It was an increase of 101 per cent, in fact, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Since the election of the coalition government, the power price has stabilised. First it fell—it fell by the sharpest decline in electricity costs in 2014 when we repealed the carbon tax—and then it crept up a little. But, over the four years of the coalition government, the average price has stabilised. As a result of the measures announced today by the Prime Minister and by Mr Frydenberg, based on the advice of the Energy Security Board, we can now expect prices to fall by between $110 and $115 per annum, as a result of those measures alone. That is in addition to, I might say, Senator Dastyari, the other measures, like, for example, the abolition of limited merits review, which the ACCC also predicted would lead to downward pressure on electricity prices.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Dastyari, a supplementary question?

Sam Dastyari (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, while attempting to sell the Turnbull government's now abandoned clean energy target, the energy minister argued it would reduce residential power prices by 10 per cent. Given the Turnbull government has delivered the highest power prices on record, why is Mr Turnbull giving up on the clean energy target he's tried so hard to sell?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Dastyari, it's not correct that the government has ever advocated a clean energy target. It is the case that Dr Finkel recommended a clean energy target, and the government, as I've told you time beyond number in this chamber, Senator Dastyari, has spent several months now considering that recommendation. We've engaged all of the relevant specialists in the field, but, in particular, we've engaged and sought the advice of the people who actually operate the Australian energy market: the Australian Energy Market Operator and the Energy Security Board. On the basis of their advice, the government has adopted a better policy, a policy that will lead to greater reductions in the price of electricity to households—that is, the National Energy Guarantee. It is not our view; it is the view of the Energy Security Board.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Dastyari, a final supplementary question?

Sam Dastyari (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, given the clean energy target has been publicly criticised by former Prime Minister Mr Abbott, George Christensen from the other place and other members of the coalition party room, isn't it clear that Mr Turnbull keeps giving up on ideas he holds so dearly because it's just easier to give in to Mr Abbott?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Dastyari, get out of the political playground for once! For goodness sake! We have, as I have assured you through many question times since the middle of the year, embarked on a careful, methodical consideration of the policy options and, as I said a moment ago, we have sought the advice of the people with the most direct specialist knowledge of the operation of the Australian energy market: the Energy Security Board, the Australian Energy Market Operator and the Australian Energy Market Commission. And it is their advice that we will actually achieve best results in terms of reducing the cost of electricity to households through the National Energy Guarantee, the policy announced by the Prime Minister in the last hour, than we would through a clean energy target. So, Senator Dastyari, that's the way the coalition makes policy: we consult the relevant experts and we make evidence based decisions upon their advice.

Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Brandis. Now, before Malcolm Turnbull became Prime Minister it was clear that he understood the magnitude of the climate challenge that we all face. It was pretty clear. When he lost the leadership he said:

I will not lead a party that is not as committed to effective action on climate change as I am.

That was a positive statement. Yet now he's leading the most pro-coal anti-renewables party in this nation's history. And it's really clear that this is a capitulation to Tony Abbott and the far right of his party, because he doesn't have the ticker to take them on. So my question is—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A point of order, Senator Williams?

John Williams (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, it's continuing with the Greens—again referring to Tony Abbott without his proper title and without any sign of respect to Malcolm Turnbull. Will you please bring these Greens to order when they are showing total disrespect for those in this place and in the other place in the way they name them?

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Williams.

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You've got no respect for him! You've got no respect for your own leader!

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order, Senator Cameron! I remind all senators to address members and senators of this place and the other place by their correct titles.

Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, it's clear that the Prime Minister doesn't have the ticker to take on Tony Abbott and the far right of his party. That's abundantly clear—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Point of order. It's on the same issue. Senator Di Natale, I did remind you. Could you address members by their correct titles?

Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Let me just get to the crux of it. What sort of leader, Mr President, puts their own political survival ahead of the future of their own grandchildren?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm afraid, Senator Di Natale, that you're deteriorating. We admired your thespian ambitions yesterday, but I'm afraid they have hit the wall. In fact, every premise in your question is wrong—every single one. As a result of the recommendations of the Energy Security Board—that group of specialists with the most immediate and intimate knowledge of the operation of the energy market, whose advice this government has chosen to follow and to adopt—the share of renewable energy in the energy mix will increase by 2030 to the range of 28 to 36 per cent. It will increase, Senator Di Natale, and the share of carbon-based energy sources, coal and gas, will reduce. So, Senator Di Natale, that premise of your question is wrong.

And you questioned the Prime Minister's motives. This is what grown-up governments do: they listen to the advice of those best in position to advise them and they consider the options. They consider the options. Through the COAG process, we commissioned Dr Alan Finkel to prepare a report. He made 50 recommendations, 49 of which the government has accepted. One recommendation in relation to a clean energy target we did consider, but we adopted a different proposal from the Energy Security Board—a group of men and women with even more immediate knowledge of the operation of the Australian energy market than that of Dr Finkel—because their proposal, announced by the Prime Minister in the last hour, will result in even more reductions of price of electricity to Australian households than Dr Finkel's clean energy target.

So, we have consulted the experts. We have considered the options. We have gone about this methodically and carefully and come up with the best choice for the Australian people. (Time expired)

Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Today is payday for the—

Honourable Senators:

Honourable senators interjecting—

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Resume your seat, Senator Di Natale. Senators, could you remove those immediately. Remove them immediately. Senator McKim! Order! That's totally disorderly. Senator Di Natale, your question.

Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President. Today is payday.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Point of order, Senator Bernardi?

Cory Bernardi (SA, Australian Conservatives) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President. My point of order is that we have the leader of a political party who is endorsing stunts by his entire team. I think you have to rule this question entirely out of order, and he abrogates his right to have a question, and you should move on to the next questioner. That is a shameful, shameful stunt by the Greens.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Bernardi. As tempted as I am to do that, I will allow Senator Di Natale to ask his question. I think he is aware, as are members of his party, that that was totally disorderly.

Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr President. Well, today's payday. It's payday. The coal and gas industry have come and cashed in their cheque today. They have. While you've been cooking up this policy on the run, which serves your coal industry mates, you need to know that you're cooking the planet and that coal does kill people. Minister, do you accept that coal is a dangerous, harmful product that kills people?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, I don't. No, I don't accept that for one moment. In fact, on any view of the Australian energy market, coal will be a very important component of the Australian energy mix for decades to come, and the presence of coal as an important continuing part of the Australian energy mix is one of the things that will make Australian electricity more affordable to Australian households when the government's National Energy Guarantee policy is put into operation.

As I said before, Senator Di Natale, it's all very well for you, a well-to do medical practitioner trying to pose as a champion of the Australian working people, but the fact is that you can afford higher electricity prices. You can afford the conceit and the virtue signalling, but they can't. So, Senator Di Natale, take a good look at yourself and the team of undergraduates behind you and get serious about this policy. (Time expired)

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Di Natale, a final supplementary question.

Richard Di Natale (Victoria, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Given that the Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, doesn't have the ticker to take on Mr Abbott and that he's effectively adopted his whole energy platform, when is the Prime Minister going to step aside and let the man who's running the show have the job?

George Brandis (Queensland, Liberal Party, Attorney-General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Di Natale, you have represented yourself as a person with a deep interest in this area of policy for as long as you have been in this place, and I think it is very instructive that not one of the three questions you have asked me has offered a single word of criticism of the policy—not a word. Every one of the three questions you've asked me has not been about the policy; it's been about cheap stunts from the team of undergraduates behind you or it's been about personal attacks on the character and motives of the Prime Minister. If you want to have an argument about policy, we're up for it, because we have adopted a sensible policy on the recommendation of the specialists who operate the Australian energy market. But you, Senator Di Natale, who pretend to be interested, can't rise above stunts.