Jenny McAllister (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Finance (Senator Cormann) and the Minister for Resources and Northern Australia (Senator Canavan) to questions without notice asked by the Leader of the Opposition in the Senate (Senator Wong) and Senator Marshall today relating to the National Energy Guarantee.

Like a couple arguing in the food court, this spat about energy has now become extremely embarrassing for everybody else around them. It's awkward enough watching the Prime Minister abandon the principles that he was willing to stand by when he lost the Liberal leadership the first time around, but it is truly tragic that, despite the fact that he has capitulated on all fronts, given up everything and lost the last shred of credibility he may have been clinging to, he still can't keep this party room together. He emerged out of the party room meeting and he was claiming victory, but it is possible that he spoke too soon, because, shortly after that, it seems we saw backbencher after backbencher ringing Sky News just to make sure that, in the constant news coverage, everybody understood who'd be crossing the floor. People wanted to know about their heroic plans, and so Mr Abbott, Mr Christensen, Mr Gee, Mr Hastie, Mr Kelly, Mr Andrews, Mr Joyce, Senator O'Sullivan, Senator Abetz and Mr Pasin were all on the front page of the paper, indicating: 'Our intention is, in fact, not to support the NEG. In fact, so much so that we are not going to vote for it.'

This is a group of people who are split on policy, split on the personalities and almost congenitally unable to craft an energy policy. We are now five years into a government and we are still waiting for a coherent energy policy that can resolve the crisis that this government has placed us in as a nation. A lot of it, of course, is driven by Mr Abbott. It has produced some hilarious moments, including this, reported in the paper, when the Prime Minister asked Mr Abbott:

"Could you please do me the courtesy of allowing me to finish my sentence?"

Colleagues of Mr Abbott said he responded: "I would have, if you had allowed me the courtesy of finishing my term."

So it's obviously quite a little bit personal. Mr Abbott has then gone on to describe, in other remarks, Mr Turnbull's ideas as 'merchant banker gobbledegook'. He has also criticised Mr Frydenberg. He said that, in John Howard's time, a submission of the kind that Mr Frydenberg presented would have had to go back to the drawing board.

But it's not just confined to Mr Abbott. We've had frontbenchers as well. Mr Dutton was asked by Ray Hadley on 2GB: 'Is the NEG suboptimal?' What did the Minister for Home Affairs say? A ringing endorsement? He said, 'Well, it's a policy that the government's got.' That's just the kind of back-up you want, isn't it? When you're out there prosecuting a policy case, one of your front-line guys says, 'Well, it's a policy the government's got.' Thank you very much, Mr Dutton. The Australian is now reporting that other frontbenchers, including the Assistant Minister to the Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Pitt, are, in fact, considering resigning their places because of their opposition to the NEG.

But, of course, there are new policy ideas continuing to swirl around as this very sophisticated debate unfolds. Apparently, Mr Joyce has made a demand for price controls. I thought it would have been obvious to everybody that that was inconsistent with Liberal values, but it took the Treasurer to point that out to Mr Joyce. We now understand that the member for Dawson has issued an entire list of demands to the Prime Minister in a meeting. The demands include the creation of a new clean coal fund, a cut in the NEG's emissions reduction target from 26 per cent to 17 per cent and changes that would allow the competition watchdog to keep AGL's Liddell coal fired power plant operating in New South Wales beyond its planned 2022 closure date. Apparently this was all very, very cordial. He was called into the Prime Minister's office. The Prime Minister 'wanted to know ideas that we have that could improve the NEG or deliver price reductions, and so I put a list to him'.

The people on the other side today would have you believe that this is all just business as usual. Well, nobody else believes that. It is a very, very public demonstration of the total dysfunction on that side of politics in relation to energy policy that has seen five years of utter paralysis. During the five years, the investment community went on strike in relation to energy, unable to invest because of a complete lack of certainty about what the policy settings are likely to be and how the energy market will work, and it is consumers who are paying the price with higher and higher prices. It has been a disaster.

Senator McKenzie, very helpfully during the last hour, pointed out that it is team work that makes the dream work. A pithy observation? I would put it to Senator McKenzie and, indeed, to everyone over there that we are not in a dream; we are in a horrible nightmare and you need to sort it out.

Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's always edifying to get to this point in the day when we commence the take-note debate and really do what the Australian people want us to do, and that is nitpick at one another. Anyway, here we go. Let's get into it. I appreciate the media commentary, the media briefing, that Senator McAllister just provided, talking us through what's been said on Sky and what's been said in The Australianall of the quotes from the newspapers. It is very, very helpful to have all of that provided to us. What does trouble me about the tone of the debate and the questions being asked by those opposite is that it's not actually about seeking a solution; it's all about what's going on over here and who is talking to whom. Who went to that meeting? Did you ring that person? This is not a constructive contribution to the national debate; this is politicking, which is something that had been alluded to by a number of the answers provided by Senator Cormann and anyone who answered questions on this particular issue.

The point was made about the Labor states, particularly the state of Victoria, which, of course, as we all know, has state elections coming up towards the end of this year—in the month of November, I believe. So, instead of doing what is right and what ought to be done—such as focusing on how to bring down power prices for Victorians, who, as I understand it, have, over a period of time, seen power prices increase by something like 300 per cent—instead of doing something that would aid them and bring down power prices, we see the Andrews government finding ways to try and make things as difficult as possible to achieve national agreement on the plan that's before the country: the plan before COAG, the NEG, the National Energy Guarantee. That's what was highlighted today. This is all about politics for the Labor Party. This is not about something we should all be talking about. There is only one side of the debate that's actually talking about the important point here today, and that is how to bring down power prices: the Liberal and the National parties. The coalition are the people who have taken this policy forward. There is one thing we're all concerned about, and that is power prices. Sure, people are making their points and their concerns known. Discussions are had. That's what happens when you want to make sure that the end product that we present to the Australian people as the policy that's going to apply to them is right. Having those discussions is an important thing to do. It's a proud hallmark of any political organisation that people are allowed to discuss, express views, put forward ideas and suggest changes. But, on the other side, that's seen as a terrible thing to do—'You can't do that. We must accept whatever is served up to us and march forth united. No debate; just do what the leader says.' That's not how it works. I don't think that's how it should work.

I look forward to contributing to the debate on this as we move forward, as I hope—as I've already mentioned—the Labor states in particular will do also, in the interests of the people they represent, the people who need to have their power prices come down. In my home state of Tasmania, under the former Labor-Green government, we saw power prices go up by 65 per cent—a shocking indictment on that government. Thankfully, we've turned the corner on that particular issue. We see power prices now heading south. People will hopefully be able to save a lot more money under the NEG when it comes into full force and people will be able to turn their heaters on at winter time. I'll never forget when the former Premier Lara Giddings, in her little newsletter to the people of Franklin, said, 'Ways to save on your power bill: turn your heater off and put on an extra jumper.' What a great message to send to the pensioners of Franklin: 'Hey, you know what: just turn your heater off. You might not be able to afford to use it. We won't do anything about power prices. We just want you to suck it up and put on an extra jumper.'

I return to the main point, and that is: this is about power prices. Not once today, not in any of the questions asked on the issue of the NEG did those opposite talk about prices. No-one mentioned the need to reduce power prices. It is not their chief concern. It is about playing politics. It is about trying to whip up some sort of division and paint a picture of how they want things to be based on what they read in the newspapers and what they hear on Sky News here in Parliament House. So my advice to those opposite, those who would like to seek to leave this country and government—God help us hopefully they never do—is to start thinking about the people we represent. Do something to bring down power prices rather than just fly up here from wherever you come from and sit in here to play politics every single week.

Chris Ketter (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Let me commence my contribution by saying that Australians want lower electricity prices. That is absolutely clear. I said yesterday in this place that that is something that is absolutely necessary for us to come the grips with. What is also clear is that the policy uncertainty, at least over the past five years—if you look at media reports, some attribute the policy uncertainty over the past 10 years—is being driven by one man: former Prime Minister Tony Abbott. He and his cohort of climate sceptics are seeking to sabotage the national interest. But the tragedy in this situation, of course, is that we have a Prime Minister who lacks the authority to deal with this group within his government.

As I rise to take note of answers, I want to start by noting that bipartisanship is the answer to the problem of rising electricity prices. The business community needs bipartisanship in order to invest for the long term. We have seen some small glimmers of bipartisanship this week in our joint response to the deplorable contribution by Senator Anning. I want to remind the voters of Queensland that, regardless of his new party allegiance, Senator Anning was put in this place because of Senator Hanson's One Nation party. So we can, from time to time, work together. If we have that bipartisanship on a regular basis we can deal with energy prices.

Households are struggling whilst the government refuses to negotiate with the Labor opposition on this matter. We are seeing households struggle, particularly in Victoria. I note the St Vincent de Paul Society has put out a report this week in relation to Victorian households. We see that Victorian households are on the worst electricity deals in the market, paying $1,000 or more each year for the same amount of power as those on the best offers. This is where we see this lack of bipartisanship affecting people who are the most vulnerable.

It is painfully clear this week that the Liberal-National government are totally, hopelessly and irreconcilably divided on this issue. You only need to look at some of the media that has been around for the last couple of days. Senator McAllister has dealt with that.

I want to return to this point that members of this government refuse to accept the science. I think there has been a significant announcement this week from the Australian Academy of Technology and Engineering. They said that building more coal-fired power stations would be an environmental and economic mistake. They have made a statement amid media speculation the government would use the ACCC's recent report to justify underwriting baseload power investments based on coal. The ATSE president, Professor Bradlow, said the academy had long advocated for technology-neutral policies that could address the energy trilemma. He went on to say that new coal-fired power stations will not reduce the cost of electricity and will not aid efforts to reduce emissions. Let's listen to the experts. Let's listen to the scientists in this area and let's knuckle down and deal with the issue of coming up with some areas of agreement. On our side, we've been prepared to extend the hand of bipartisanship to negotiate something, but on the other side we have a government which is hopelessly crippled by the division within it.

It is time for this government to get out of the way so that we can deliver certainty for energy prices. We know that this policy uncertainty is driving up prices. We heard this from the Treasury officials at estimates. The LNP has done nothing to encourage business investment in renewables. That is what is needed. Their inaction has paralysed the industry. It was Labor that set up the Clean Energy Finance Corporation to encourage investment in renewables. We have a strong record on protecting the environment and addressing climate change. We have ambition and drive. We need this government to get out of the way.

Linda Reynolds (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I too rise to take note of the minister's answer. I say at the outset that I could not be prouder to be a member of the coalition team. We have had extremely robust debate on this critically important issue. I was in the party room and I spoke in support of the NEG package. I'm very proud of what Minister Frydenberg, in particular, has done with the support of his cabinet colleagues. I think those opposite sometimes forget or don't even understand that robust debate inside a party room is actually a healthy thing to have on such an important policy. No matter how often those opposite say otherwise, both party rooms strongly endorsed this program for the National Energy Guarantee.

Let's have a look at how we've developed this plan and what we found when we came to government. Those opposite very often like to pretend that nothing happened and that we didn't inherit any particular situations in this or any other policy area. So let's have a look at Labor's track record, federal and state, and see the position that Labor left us in, which we have been successfully dealing with. It is absolutely a fact to say that the Labor Party is a party of higher energy prices. Remember last time Labor was in office, electricity prices—guess how much, Senator Fawcett. Madam Deputy President, when you were in government, how much did power prices rise over your six years? They rose by 100 per cent. Over your six years, Australian men and women, families and businesses were paying 100 per cent more for their power than when you came to government.

Over the past decade, those opposite have nearly crippled this nation with successive flip-flops on energy policy. Who can forget the CPRS, the carbon tax and the CET, the ETS and the EIS, the pink batts, the contract for coal closures, 'cash for clunkers' and the citizens assembly? Speaking about the carbon tax, when the coalition repealed the carbon tax, which those opposite promised they would never bring in but of course did, it led to the largest fall in electricity prices on record, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Even more importantly, the ACCC said that it saved $550 on the average household bill. That was due to the actions of this side of the chamber, and I am incredibly proud to have been part of that.

During those six years of Labor government, electricity prices doubled. The federal and state Labor policies have continued to put pressure on prices, through things like their job-destroying gas bans and moratoriums, unrealistic and unachievable renewable energy targets and open hostility to reliable base-load power. Those opposite don't yet seem to get that there is a direct link between these extremist green ideologies and power prices. In fact, they doubled the power prices on Australian families during their last term in office. And the tragedy is they've got the same policies now, if not worse. Not only do they sit there criticising this side of the chamber for making sound policy decisions to fix the problems that they created, but, if they got in again, they would do exactly the same thing to Australian businesses and households. This government's action is already having positive effects. Wholesale electricity prices are down around 25 per cent in 2018 compared to last year. Retail power bills have been reduced, as of 1 July, across New South Wales, Queensland and South Australia. You can see that our policies are working. The National Energy Guarantee will continue the progress. (Time expired)

Question agreed to.