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

My question is for the Leader of the Government in the Senate, representing the Prime Minister. Bloomberg New Energy Finance released their global New Energy Outlook 2018 earlier this week, and it said that 'renewables will become the backbone of the system', that 'Australia can once again become a cheap energy superpower' and that industries 'will relocate onshore'. Minister, the economics are now crystal clear. Renewables are bringing down power prices. They're creating jobs. They will attract new industries here. So why is the government chaining the country to the National Energy Guarantee, an energy policy that will hold back renewables; will ensure that prices, rather than going down, go up; and will hold down progress in this country?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank Senator Di Natale for that question. Our plan to implement the National Energy Guarantee will deliver lower electricity prices, will deliver increased reliability and stability in our energy system and of course will also help us meet the emissions reduction commitments that we signed on to in Paris. So the government stand by our policy. It's a policy that is entirely technology neutral, as it should be, because that is the best opportunity we have to ensure that we can continue to bring down the price of electricity, that we can continue to improve the reliability and the stability of our electricity system and that we can continue to meet those emissions reduction targets that we've committed to internationally.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Di Natale, a supplementary question.

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

Thank you, Minister. The Bloomberg report also said:

While arguments about the transition to clean energy continue to plague the Turnbull government, in the market, the debate is over …

Minister, can you outline the extent to which Tony Abbott and his so-called 'coalition against social progress' is a threat to the future prosperity of Australian households and businesses seeking to thrive in a society with a clean, modern, 21st century energy system?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Tony Abbott, of course, is a great former coalition Prime Minister who's made a significant contribution to the economic prosperity and the security of Australia. If it weren't for Tony Abbott, we would still have the mining tax. We would still have the carbon tax and the boats. The chaos at our borders that Labor and the Greens imposed on the Australian people would still be happening. So let me assure you that the contribution that former Prime Minister Tony Abbott made to Australia was a fine contribution indeed and Tony Abbott is a valued member of the coalition team. Tony Abbott is a valued member of the Turnbull government team and, of course, what we do in the coalition is talk about policy. We talk about policy. All of us on this side of the chamber are united: we are interested in lower electricity prices. We want to see lower electricity prices, we want to see increased stability and we are committed to ensuring that we can meet our emissions reduction targets in a way that is economically sensible, and that is, of course, precisely what we're doing.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Di Natale, a further supplementary question.

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

Minister, the latest plan released by the Energy Security Board shows that the National Energy Guarantee will enable big polluting states like New South Wales to free-ride on the emission cuts of other states. Minister, why does the government deride the renewable energy targets of places like South Australia and at the same time intend to put in place a scheme that's going to rely on targets like those in South Australia to deliver the guarantee?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Perhaps Senator Di Natale was hiding under a rock in recent years, or maybe he was somewhere in a party room meeting in a cave. Do you know what happened under the previous Labor government's energy policy? The lights went out! They couldn't keep the lights on. On this side of parliament we do not support a policy that is not able to keep the lights on. We are in favour of lower prices, we're in favour of keeping the lights on and we're in favour of meeting our emissions reduction targets in a way that makes sense economically but also ensures that our businesses and our families can continue to have reliable access to electricity supplies.

Any policy framework that generates a complete, statewide blackout is a massive policy failure. If you want to go to the next election arguing in favour of a policy failure like that, go right ahead. We will argue against you, and the Australian people can decide: Do they want blackouts or do they want reliable energy supplies? Do they want lower electricity prices or higher prices under you?

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Environment and Water (Senate)) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Prime Minister, Senator Cormann. In an article entitled 'Nats join revolt against energy guarantee', the assistant minister to the Prime Minister, Nationals MP Keith Pitt, has revealed:

… at least seven of the 21 Nationals MPs—and potentially more—had serious concerns with the NEG …

Why is the Prime Minister bothering to seek support for his latest energy policy from states and territories when not even his own assistant minister supports it?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm sure that the outstanding member for Hinkler would be pleased to know that Senator Pratt is interested in what he has to say. He does an outstanding job; he stands up for his constituents in Hinkler extremely well, as every Liberal and Nationals senator and member of parliament, of course, does. What I would say to you is that Assistant Minister Pitt is absolutely, 100 per cent committed to the policy objectives of the Turnbull government—that is, lower electricity prices, more reliable energy supplies and meeting our emissions reduction targets in a way that is economically sensible and doesn't lead to statewide blackouts, as happened in the state of South Australia.

I know that the Labor Party is always more interested in the politics than in the policy, but on our side of parliament we are a vibrant coalition—

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order, Senator Cormann. Senator Wong on a point of order.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It was direct relevance, although perhaps the phrase 'vibrant coalition' will deal with seven of 21 Nationals MPs considering not supporting the NEG, which was the question.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You've reminded the minister of the question. I consider that the minister is being relevant to the question in talking about the member quoted and about energy.

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Liberal and National Party coalition is a strong, united and vibrant team, and we do engage in policy debate, because we are also committed to advancing the public interest, and long may that be the case, because it helps ensure that we make the best possible decisions for working families across Australia and for our economic security into the future.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Pratt, a supplementary question.

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Environment and Water (Senate)) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Former Prime Minister Abbott yesterday refused to rule out crossing the floor if asked to vote for the National Energy Guarantee, saying, 'I hope it doesn't come to questions of crossing the floor.' How many of the Turnbull government's own members intend to cross the floor in the latest battle in its ongoing climate war?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm sure Senator Pratt will be relieved to know that the coalition is a strong and united team and that we do engage in policy discussion. When legislation eventually comes forward it'll go through the normal processes and all will be revealed at that time, and I'm sure Senator Pratt will be watching very closely.

Scott Ryan (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Pratt, a final supplementary question.

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Environment and Water (Senate)) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Former Prime Minister Abbott went on to say:

It's a fundamental failure of process, stifling the proper debate that we should be able to have inside our party room.

Is Prime Minister Turnbull so scared of his own party room that he won't even allow a proper process and debate?

Mathias Cormann (WA, Liberal Party, Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm sure, again, that Senator Pratt will be very relieved to hear that we have great debates inside the coalition party room. Indeed, we had a great debate on the energy guarantee proposal when it first came forward. And you wouldn't be surprised to hear me say that from time to time the issue of the National Energy Guarantee comes up in conversation. So the conversation inside the coalition party room will continue, and I'm sure that you will watch very carefully when the legislation eventually comes forward. I look forward to Senator Pratt and the Labor Party supporting a policy that will lead to lower electricity prices and improved reliability rather than your discredited agenda, which would lead to higher electricity prices and less-reliable energy supplies.