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

I, and also on behalf of Senator Waters, move:

That the Industry Research and Development (Bankable Feasibility Study on High-Efficiency Low-Emissions Coal Plant in Collinsville Program) Instrument 2020, made under the Industry Research and Development Act 1986, be disallowed [F2020L00772].

There is one party in this chamber that wants Queenslanders to pay more for their electricity and their name is the Liberal National Party. This government's preference for endless culture wars and stunts over real policy and real outcomes has seen them brush aside every conceivable concern with the proposed new coal-fired power station in Collinsville. They've brushed aside concerns about whether the business case stacked up. They've brushed aside concerns about the environment. They've brushed aside concerns about whether it will raise energy prices and they've brushed aside concerns about the probity of the project. It makes you wonder, doesn't it, what would happen if they showed the same commitment to protecting older Australians in aged care as they have shown to progressing a project that even the Queensland LNP opposition doesn't believe deserves public funds.

This project does not stack up economically, and if it goes ahead it will increase power prices for Queenslanders and leave taxpayers on the hook for billions. This isn't back-of-the-envelope analysis; it is the considered opinion of industry and experts. The weight of analysis says that new coal-fired power stations in Queensland would increase power prices, because they are more expensive to build and more expensive to run than alternatives.

Independent analysis undertaken by consultants Energy Edge found a new ultra-supercritical coal-fired power station was only commercially viable if there were high wholesale prices—and let that sink in, because that's what these people are arguing for. It reflects what analysts have been saying generally about new coal-fired power. Bloomberg New Energy Finance says:

But even if the government were to completely de-risk coal by paying for the whole plant and guaranteeing an exemption from any future liabilities, the lowest LCOE that could be achieved is … still well above wind, solar or gas.

AIG says:

… new coal-fired generators are unlikely to bring current prices down because they require even higher prices to be bankable; they are a poor fit to stabilise the grid …

Why don't we have a look at what the Prime Minister said? What did Mr Morrison say when he was the Treasurer? He said:

… we shouldn't kid ourselves a new HELE plant would bring down electricity prices anytime soon.

And why? Because, as Mr Morrison went on to say:

…new cheap coal is a bit of a myth.

Those are his words, not mine. So not only is the government putting almost $4 million of taxpayer's funds to investigate the feasibility of what the Prime Minister has described as a myth; the public could be on the hook for billions more for this project.

Shine Energy have requested that the government provide an indemnity against climate risk and the Australian Industry Group has estimated that this could cost the government $17 billion. That would be on top of whatever other contribution of public money would be required to actually build this multibillion-dollar project.

Senator Canavan and others supporting this project should be up-front with Australians about just how much it will cost them. That is only if the plant ends up being built. And the government knows that the project doesn't stack up, is unlikely to be built and the promised jobs will not materialise. Senator Canavan and others are out there in the media saying that a new coal-fired power plant will generate jobs for Queensland. Well, it's not what his colleagues think. Mr Zimmerman, Mr Sharma and Mr Falinski have all gone on the record to say that the project does not stack up economically or environmentally and it won't go ahead. As Mr Falinski says:

… it will not lead to a new coal-fired power station being built.

There are more economically efficient and environmentally cleaner options for power generation in Australia.

It's backed up by the analysis from the Australian Energy Council—that is, the peak body for electricity generators and retailers—who found that there was not a pressing commercial case for the construction of a coal-fired generator in North Queensland.

In fact, the government came to a very similar conclusion. This government has a specific program to underwrite new generation investment, and when this project submitted its business case it wasn't strong enough even to be shortlisted, let alone offered a grant. How did the government get around this? Minister Taylor's department announced that Shine would get a grant for a feasibility study into Collinsville and then two days later invited the company to apply for the grant.

It's the reversal of the usual order of things, isn't it? Normally, you invite applications and then you announce the results. It's unusual enough that the Auditor-General has agreed to investigate it, meaning that Minister Taylor's actions are subject to yet another probity investigation, an experience he must be deeply familiar with by now. Even the Queensland LNP opposition has declined to commit public funds for the project.

Those opposite are playing a cruel hoax on the people of Queensland. The promised jobs do not exist. They exist in the press releases, stunts and media statements of those opposite. Listen to what Mr Zimmerman, Mr Sharma and Mr Falinski have said, because they have been clear. They have said that this project does not stack up and will never proceed.

But there are jobs in energy for North Queensland and, indeed, across Australia. They are real jobs being generated by real investments in renewable energy right now. In Queensland 40 large-scale renewable projects have commenced operations, are currently being constructed or have been financially committed. There are solar parks in Wide Bay, Darling Downs, Mackay, Chinchilla, Clare, Barcaldine, Clermont, Toowoomba and Warwick. There are even renewable projects in Collinsville, the site of this ill-fated new proposal. The projects across the state total $7.5 billion in investment, with a forecast of more than 6,000 construction jobs arising as a result. And there are more large-scale projects in the pipeline—more than 20 megawatts worth—which have the potential to generate another 28,000 jobs for Queenslanders.

Just last week the state government committed hundreds of millions for renewable energy zones, and this could help fund projects such as a two-gigawatt wind, solar, storage and transmission project dubbed the Central Queensland Power project, which will assist Gladstone with supporting its heavy industry and stimulating the development of new industries such as green hydrogen.

Renewables have the potential to create export income as well. An undersea cable from a planned major solar farm project in the Northern Territory could supply Singapore with sustainable energy by 2027. It has been described as the largest solar farm and battery under development anywhere in the world. It's not a pipedream; it's been granted major project status by the Northern Territory government.

The thing is that Australia's rich natural resources give us the opportunity to be a renewable energy superpower, exporting into our region. You'd think that would be of interest to a government that claims to be interested in jobs, but they are obsessed with a feasibility study for a power station that doesn't stack up. What more can you expect from a man who found time to bring a lump of coal into parliament as a stunt and who leads a party that has had 19 separate energy policies in seven years? The government's lack of an energy policy is projected to cost this country 11,000 renewable energy jobs in the next two years.

Enough is enough. The government has shown over the last seven years that they are indifferent to our international commitments, they are ambivalent about the risks that climate change poses to our natural world and our way of life and they are hostile to renewable energy. They are environmental vandals and they can add economic vandals to their CV as well. The government's obsession with stunts will raise electricity prices for Queensland and cost the nation thousands of jobs in renewables.

Larissa Waters (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Here we are again. It's deja vu. The Greens are begging the chamber not to give yet more free public money to fossil fuel donors. We're really proud to be co-sponsoring this disallowance motion, which is just cooked from whichever angle you look at it. The chamber could actually stand in the way. We could do our job and properly allocate public money—$3.3 million of taxpayer money—and we could stop it being allocated to coal. We could block this climate-destroying coal-fired power station from going ahead.

What has happened here is that a thoroughly inexperienced company has proposed a coal-fired power station and the feasibility study for the same in the middle of a climate crisis after the nation just had the most destructive bushfires our history has ever recorded. We here in the Senate have the ability to stop this rorting and stop this destruction, and that's precisely why the Greens are moving this disallowance.

Not only is it cooked to give public money to a coal-fired power station in a climate crisis after those bushfires but it is cooked to dish out public money as a pre-election slush fund to try to shore up your own power. Unfortunately, we've seen quite a bit of that, and I'll come back to that point. Surprise, surprise! The company that would get this windfall gain, Shine Energy, has connections with mega political donor and coal giant Glencore. Incidentally, Glencore would directly benefit from the power station's construction and it's been lobbying the government to support the same and to support the coal industry. But it gets worse. Shine Energy have no relevant experience. They couldn't get funding from any existing program, so the government just created an entirely new grants fund and then awarded a grant to Shine Energy two or three days before the money had even been applied for. I'll go through the dates. On 8 February—a fantastic day for anyone born on that day, such as myself—Minister Taylor announced that Shine would receive up to $4 million of public money for a feasibility study into a so-called low-emission coal-fired power plant, which is the biggest misnomer of the century. Two days later, Shine Energy was asked to apply. That's two days after they'd been announced as the winner of this public money.

Despite the fact that stakeholders, including the Queensland government, have strongly questioned the need for and the validity of a power station, the government just charged on regardless. They set up the Supporting Reliable Energy Infrastructure Program and then developed guidelines specific to the Collinsville power station. They then asked only Shine Energy to apply for that money. This is despite the fact that Shine has no relevant experience—no past projects—and funding for the project has been rejected by UNGI. Since the funding has been announced, Shine has already said that it's not enough money; they're going to need more public money to do a feasibility study. I'm trying to think of an analogy. It would be like me asking for public money to open a video store—something that I've never done before and that nobody wants because we have more efficient alternatives. The only difference in that analogy, of course, is that I'm not a massive donor to the LNP, nor am I promising them cushy jobs once they leave parliament.

In the too-long history of this cooked government, we've seen grants awarded with no criteria and grants that ignored the criteria and happened to be in marginal seats just before an election. Now we have a grant awarded with criteria that have been specifically drafted to justify a winner that's already been chosen. This is exactly why we need a Senate inquiry into all of these pre-election slush funds. That's on the books for next week, and I'll be having conversations with my colleagues about this latest example of the need for more scrutiny of how the government are misusing taxpayer dollars to shore up their own failing political fortunes, in a climate crisis, by giving funds to coal-fired power. It doesn't escape anyone's notice that this latest scandal is by serial offender Angus Taylor. It's nothing more than a misuse of taxpayer funds to prop up fossil fuels.

We can save everyone a little bit of money on a feasibility study. It is not feasible to build a new coal-fired power station in an already crowded market in a climate crisis. None of the experts say this is economically feasible. Nobody wants to put in any money to fund it, and the previous speaker just noted how the Prime Minister himself had acknowledged that this wasn't a viable option. Public money should not be wasted on fanciful, self-interested projects. This sort of money should be spent on supporting workers to retrain—workers who are watching the coal industry dwindle and are worried about their future. We want to make sure that they're looked after and retrained and that they're supported into new industries that have a long-term future and won't damage their health with black lung syndrome. But this sort of money could be used to shore up and re-establish a domestic manufacturing base. Central Queensland and North Queensland could be building solar panels and wind turbines. We could be then mandating the use of those locally built components in clean energy projects. We could be putting money into public housing to end homelessness. We could be investing in clean energy and giving young people the chance to find work as we recover from a global pandemic.

There is nothing 'low-emissions' about a coal-fired power station, and yet it is the so-called emissions reduction minister who is championing a highly polluting coal-fired power station. One renewable energy commentator has described this as '$3.6 million to a company that lacks the competency to pull off a project that will never stack up.' This is just yet another pre-election slush fund with taxpayer dollars to try to shore up seats. We all know the Nats needed an announceable in the lead-up to the last election, but this project is such a dog that not even the Queensland LNP want money to go to it. They have already distanced themselves from it. So I'm afraid former Minister Canavan and his Nationals counterparts are really out on their own on this one, which is exactly why this money should be disallowed. ARENA is running out of money in a few months, and they've had a billion dollars stripped from their budget, thanks to—sadly—Liberal and Labor teaming up in the last parliament. That's something that this $3.6 million grant could be usefully and meaningfully allocated to.

This coal-fired power station will never be built. The Liberal backbenchers know it. Even the Prime Minister knows it. And Labor's spokesperson on, I think, mining—surprise, surprise—Mr Joel Fitzgibbon knows it. No investor is going to sink money into a steam-turbine technology in one of the most congested parts of the grid in the world, when the world is acting on global warming. This company has not even built a fence, let alone a coal-fired power station. The only people that are clueless enough to commit money to this project are the current bunch of cabinet ministers who take donations from the coal industry, who probably will go off and work for the coal industry once they leave parliament and who are using somebody else's money to pay for it—your money; taxpayer money. This is a culture war, and taxpayer money is being frittered away as a result.

This feasibility study is going to tell us what everybody knows: it is a waste of money, and it's a waste of money that could be better spent on actually creating real jobs—not phantom, fake promises, but real jobs for regional Queenslanders, like they deserve and like they need. We could be spending it on manufacturing, we could be spending it on building clean energy components and we could be spending it on schools and hospitals to give people the services that they deserve and that they pay for. This is taxpayer money. Even outfits like the AiG, the Ai GROUP, have said that it will never happen.

I think the previous speaker mentioned that if there was proper indemnification of this project against future carbon liability—if we ever have a carbon price brought back in in this nation, like we had 10 years ago when we had world-leading climate laws—$17 billion in payments would be required. The reason that we have this slush fund that's been proposed and announced as an election commitment, and then hastily patched up, and a whole special grant that's been created and allocated to a company that has zero experience doing this sort of thing, is the millions of dollars in donations that the Liberal, National and, I might add, Labor parties receive from the coal industry and from the fossil fuel industry. With this proposal, the government is actually standing in the way of the wave of clean, lasting, reliable jobs that could be created if public money, and private money, was invested in genuinely clean renewable energy—not the nonsense that is 'low-emissions coal'. As I said before, it's the biggest misnomer in history.

If this coal-fired power plant were, miraculously, to go ahead—massively subsidised by the taxpayer, in an age of a climate crisis, and not creating anywhere near the jobs that that region needs—then it would actually drive regional jobs out of regional Queensland. The climate impacts that could flow from yet more coal in the system would further endanger the tourism industry, the agriculture industry and any other industry that relies on a livable, safe climate. The government have a choice here. They could see reason; they could listen to almost every single expert on this topic and understand that this is a dog of an investment, a waste of public money. Some of their own backbenchers are in the papers today acknowledging that. They could redirect this money to where it will genuinely do good, where it will help people, where it will create jobs and the sorts of services that people deserve.

This is yet another test for the government that I fear they will fail. Sadly, they are dominated by a rump of climate-change-denying dinosaurs who accept donations from the coal, gas and oil industries and who, concerned about their own future employment prospects, line up lobbying jobs with industry representative bodies or directly with companies, as we have already seen happen in the last 10 or 20 years. They are getting in the way of a livable climate for all of us and a prosperous economy that would create jobs in areas of regional Queensland that are desperate for a plan for what comes next as the rest of the world continues to turn away from dirty coal.

That is the choice the government have before them. Thankfully, the Greens have been joined by Labor this time around—although I suspect they've got just a bit of internal dissent on this matter; we'll see how long they can hold the ship together on this issue. We've got a chance here to ensure that public money is spent wisely, that it doesn't worsen the climate crisis, that it doesn't go to a two-bit company that has never done anything like this before but has some convenient connections to a big political donor. The Senate has the chance to disallow this instrument. We have 15 sitting days from it being laid on the table to have the chance to vote on this issue, but our position has always been very clear: we do not support public money going to prop up an industry that is damaging all of us and damaging the natural world. So I'm really proud to be co-sponsoring the disallowance of this instrument.

What I hope will happen next week, when we bring on a suggestion for a Senate inquiry into all of the different rorts and grants and funding the government established in the lead-up to the last election to try to shore up their own failing fortunes, is that we get some support from across the chamber. It is clear that this government has no respect for public money; it's simply using your money to do favours for its corporate mates, who then, in a bizarre sort of washing-machine move, donate money back to the coalition.

So let's do the right thing here, folks. We've got the chance to have a good outcome—to use public money to make people's lives better by investing in projects that stack up and can address the climate crisis. Let's go for it!

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It gives me great pleasure, as leader of the National Party, to stand in the chamber tonight and speak against the disallowance moved by one of the great coalitions: the Labor Party and the Australian Greens. Is there any better example of what Queenslanders think about a feasibility study into the Collinsville high-efficiency, low-emission coal-fired power station than the federal election results? Just look at the federal election results—just check them out. The LNP rocked it in. Central Queensland and northern Queensland absolutely stood behind initiatives such as this one, which our government put on the table and took to the election. We are very proud to deliver on looking into a feasibility study on whether this power station should actually be built and, therefore, drive down power prices for Queenslanders so that they can enjoy a post-COVID-19 recovery plan from this government that does include advanced manufacturing. So we are not just talking about the potential new jobs that the power station will bring, nor just the mining jobs that getting the coal for this power station will bring, but indeed also those value-adding industries out in regional Queensland—all this from an advanced manufacturing plan that this government has post-COVID that needs low-cost energy to power and drive it.

For those of you who can't see the chamber tonight, we have a full bench of the Greens, we have a pretty full bench from the National and the Liberal parties and the LNP Senate team, but it is cooee crickets on the Labor side of the chamber tonight. Other than the Labor senator that moved this disallowance, let's be fair, there is not a Queenslander in sight tonight. Do you know why? They tried to pull this motion. They tried to pull away from it. Senator Waters, we have locked you in; we know the Greens Queenslanders are here. The trouble is that regional Queensland doesn't vote for you.

I just want to read from this morning's TheCourier Mail. There might be a reason we don't have a Queensland senator here to actually speak for this feasibility study. It's not very often that I agree with the old CFMEU. Sometimes the forestry division in my home state of Victoria can get excited about the sustainable and renewable forestry industry that the Greens and now the Labor Party want to end. Can I just talk about what happened in Queensland and why there is not a Labor Party senator here to stand up for this disallowance? It is appalling. It's not just Joel Fitzgibbon and the Otis group that have cottoned on to what's wrong with the Labor Party; all of the Labor senators know that they have lost their way, that they do not stand for the working class in this country anymore. Who stands for jobs in the regions, jobs in traditional industries and jobs in the mining industry and construction industry? It is the LNP. It is the Liberal Party and it is the National Party, and we are very proud to do that.

What did the mining and construction division of the CFMEU do today? They walked away.

Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Tell us why!

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am happy to quote, Senator Scarr. As the union boss, Michael Ravbar, said:

The leadership vacuum in the left has seen a once powerful voice for working Queenslanders atrophy to the point where today it is little more than a creche for party hacks.

I could have been quoting Senator Matt Canavan. But, no, that is the mining and construction division of the CFMEU in Queensland. He goes on:

Quite simply, the so-called left faction—

which is the powerful ally of the Australian Greens and running the Labor Party—poor old Joel Fitzgibbon, a true believer, representing coalmining country, trying to do his best to hold back the tide; I'm happy to send him a membership form to the National Party—

is now merely an impotent and self-serving echo chamber for a cabal of Peel Street elite who have totally lost touch with their working class roots.

I couldn't have said it better myself; I just would have substituted Spring Street. He goes on and on and on.

Those of us in this chamber who actually care about working Australians, who actually care to see growth and development in industries that underpin regional economies and our export task, know how important the mining industry is and how important it is in this country to have cheap, reliable power. We hear those opposite talk about all the jobs available in renewable energy, but what we have seen it do is push up energy prices in this country. Our government is absolutely committed to meeting our international commitments on emissions, keeping jobs in regional Australia and growth and economic underpinning industries, and also ensuring we get the price of electricity down, because you cannot run manufacturing plant lines if you keep getting breaks in your electricity. It just doesn't work. In my home state, and I am sure it is the same—

Honourable senators interjecting—

The Queensland senators tonight are loud and proud on the floor of the Senate, standing up for their state and getting this feasibility study done. I think if you have a break of about 15 seconds it can cost you hundreds of thousands of dollars. So reliability is important, but they don't actually want to understand or talk about the fact that solar and renewables don't provide you with the reliability yet. That is a fact.

Senator Waters interjecting—

Senator Waters, it is a scientific fact and I look forward to prosecuting this. We have 15 days for these guys to disallow this motion; I hope we get to do this every single day because we have speakers lined up on this side of the chamber to stand up for our policy. But it is cooee crickets with the Labor Party.

We're not surprised that the Greens all want to take their 15 minutes of fame to talk about why this is a bad thing for Queensland—go for it! Knock yourselves out! You hold so many seats; you really speak particularly for regional Queensland! Have you checked out your vote? They walk away from you.

An independent strategic study has found that system strength is a real—

Senator Scarr interjecting—

Thank you, Senator Scarr, I hope you get an opportunity tonight to make that contribution. The independent strategic study has found that system strength is a real concern in Central and northern Queensland and that new synchronous generation, like coal, gas or pumped hydro, is a priority to meet the energy needs of the region.

The only evangelicals in this particular public debate are the Greens and the Labor Party, who only see one way to produce electricity. Here on our side we are not acolytes to one particular form of energy generation. We accept that renewables have a role: solar, hydro, wind. We also understand and appreciate the increasing contribution that gas will make and we look to state governments to get serious about opening up that resource so that we can build a 21st century advanced manufacturing system in this country, like the great Black Jack McEwan did through the fifties and sixties, post war.

Paul Scarr (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A great man!

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A great man, thank you Senator Scarr. We also understand that coal has a role. I was very excited today to see that the New South Wales state government has lifted the moratorium on uranium, so watch this space. We have really exciting technological solutions for our country which are going to put world-class science to the task of low-emission, high-energy production that will power our communities and our industries going forward.

Senator McMahon interjecting—

Absolutely—thank you so much, Senator McMahon from the NT. You've got a lot of uranium at your place. I'm proud we're delivering on that election commitment. I know that everybody is excited to talk about how we're doing that, and I thank the minister. I know that Michelle Landry in Central Queensland, in Rockhampton, was out today on this particular topic and I know that Senator Matt Canavan is incredibly passionate about this project.

We hope that the feasibility study stacks up. But, if it doesn't, then we'll make the sensible decision about how to use our taxpayer dollars. At least we'll have the facts at hand instead of blindly following the religion of catastrophic climate change and also not fully appreciating doing due diligence with taxpayers' money. We understand that the public has a right to go to work in sustainable, exciting and long-term careers out in the regions. That includes in the mining industry, and it is very tragic that tonight, as we debate the future of mining in this country, we could not find one Queensland senator from a great mining state actually stand up here and put their voice to this motion.

Nick McKim (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What about Senator Waters?

Malcolm Roberts (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia, I wonder whether people know that Liberal, Labor, Nationals and Greens climate policies and renewables subsidies are costing households $13 billion every year? That's $1,300 per household. I wonder whether Senator McAllister is aware of the growing anger within the parliamentary Labor Party towards new Labor's insane anti-coal position which is killing workers' jobs and killing Australian industry?

At least the new Labor Party, in abandoning blue-collar workers, abandoning small businesses, abandoning large employers in trade exposed industries, abandoning mine workers, abandoning rural communities, abandoning manufacturers and abandoning city and rural families is clear in its message.

I wonder what Mr Fitzgibbon from new Labor thinks about this disallowance motion? What about Senator Sterle? Senator Gallacher? Senator Farrell? These senators are trying to be true to their working roots yet find it increasingly difficult facing the unicorns who ride their rainbow coloured bikes to parliament in a vain attempt to mimic the virtue signalling yet hollow Greens. These senators try to put the 'u' back in Labor, vainly, and we support them. I've just acknowledged a quote from Mr Michael Ravbar, the head of the CFMEU in Queensland. He says the Labor Party is a 'creche for party hacks'. Labor is a creche for party hacks. It has lost touch with workers.

Next is the Greens. It's now day 352 since I last challenged Senator Waters to debate me, and she still won't debate me. It's day 352 since I asked her to provide the empirical scientific evidence for doing something about human produced carbon dioxide, and all she can do is shriek 'climate crisis'—no data, no facts. Here's what drives One Nation: facts, not slogans.

Senator McKenzie mentioned the New South Wales parliament lifting the ban on uranium mining. That was driven by Mark Latham from One Nation. Here are some facts: 39 per cent of electricity bills are due to climate policies that have driven $8 billion in private sector malinvestment, destabilising and destroying base-load power. These costs are the work of respected economist Dr Alan Moran, who used the government's own data and thus cannot be sensibly refuted. Energy-intensive industries and value-adding food and minerals processing are moving to countries with cheap energy like China, India and Asia, who use our high-quality clean coal to generate cheap power while the same power from our clean coal under Australian climate policies has a price three times as high thanks to Labor, the Liberals, the Nationals and the Greens.

Australia once had the world's cheapest electricity, yet now our prices are amongst the world's highest. Manufacturing in our country has dropped from 17 per cent of our national economy in the 1980s to now be just six per cent, and many hundreds of thousands of blue-collar worker jobs have been sent overseas. The Greens say we could be rebuilding manufacturing like China, who use coal, hydro and nuclear and have one-third of the cost for electricity because they don't have the climate policies and subsidies of the Greens, Labor, Liberals and Nationals.

As a kid, I lived in the bush. In my first year of high school, I cycled to school every day. We road past the Kurri Kurri aluminium smelter in the Hunter Valley, which was built there because of cheap, reliable, stable, secure and environmentally responsible coal-fired power in the Hunter. It's now shut due to climate policies, driving power prices to double what they were just 10 years ago. Gone are the jobs—kaput!

Climate policies are ravaging agriculture after stealing farmers' rights to use their own land thanks to the policies put in place by Prime Minister John Howard's and John Anderson's government. This is destroying food security and increasing food prices. High electricity prices are gutting manufacturing, gutting agriculture and gutting small and large businesses. Our nation's productive capacity, economic sovereignty and economic resilience are being decimated and turning our country from being independent to dependent on other nations.

Climate alarmists are pushing policies aimed at fundamentally decarbonising the economy from 2050. That means de-industrialising Australia. Such a radical change with severe consequences to lifestyles and livelihoods should be based on extraordinary evidence—empirical data from solid measurements with specified quantified impacts which must first justify fundamental change. High-cost policies need solid scientific evidence as justification. The policies' impacts must be specified before implementation and measured during implementation. None of this was done in this country. I'll discuss this next week. For now, I'll discuss some of the specifics of the Moran report's insights into electricity prices.

The government claims that the proportion of household electricity bills that is due to renewables is $90 a year. Dr Moran's report, which cannot be sensibly refuted because it includes the government's own information, says direct costs are $536 per household. The total costs per household are $1,300. The additional cost of climate policies on our power bills is not the 6½ per cent the government claims; it's 39 per cent. Renewables distort low-cost coal-based power and more than double the wholesale electricity price from $45.50 to $92.50. China and India use our clean coal to sell electricity at 8c a kilowatt. Australian electricity is three times that, at 25c a kilowatt hour. All Australians have a right to benefit from our rich natural resources. Australians need to know that the true cost of electricity would be $13 billion less per year if cheap, affordable, reliable coal production were not lumbered with policies that distort the market toward expensive and unreliable wind and solar. These renewables or intermittents destroy jobs, kill productive capacity and waste investment. As I said, Dr Moran uses the government's own data and can't be sensibly refuted. What he's also found out is that this data, although it's still available, is not easily found by the layman. It used to be consolidated—no longer. It's hidden so that people can't see the real cost of these intermittent energy sources that create artificially high electricity and energy prices, savage our living standards and undermine our economic resilience and competitiveness—and they are going to be needed during the COVID recovery.

Ironically, in the last 170 years we have got away from being at the whim of nature: famines, the impacts of climate and the impacts of weather. We've become independent of these. Now we're going back to weather-dependent wind and solar, and we've got $8 billion per year in private investment diverted to these inefficient destroyers of industry. After two decades, these generators still continue to receive subsidies. After 20 years with subsidies, renewables remain unviable and are a parasitic malinvestment in our energy systems. Why do I say parasitic? They kill their host—the people of Australia. Wind and solar have inherently high consumption of resources and very low energy density, which means they're even less efficient. A coal-fired power station needs 35 tonnes of steel per kilowatt hour generated. Wind requires 543 tonnes of steel per kilowatt hour generated. That's why wind is such an inherently high-cost item. Weather-dependent wind and solar will never move beyond being dependent, parasitic infants, and taxpayers will forever pay for their inherent deficiencies. Climate policies and renewables are a malinvestment in the economy. If the same money were invested in the real economy, it would increase productivity, jobs and health. For every subsidised so-called green-energy job, 2.2 jobs are lost elsewhere in the real economy or could have been created in the real economy with that same money. That money is wasted on subsidised green-energy jobs. They're parasitic and they're killing their host.

There has been a study by Dr Brian Fisher, the former head of the Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics, using the government's model, which he has updated. His study of renewables showed that Labor's 50 per cent renewable energy target would cause Australia to lose income of $1.2 trillion between now and 2030. That's more than half of this year's gross domestic product. Basically, we'd be working for the next half a year and it would be wiped out in the next nine years—just from the Renewable Energy Target. Think about these facts. It would require an electricity price of $157 per megawatt hour, more than double what it was in 2016, plus—think about this, Labor Party—wages would be cut to 23 per cent below what they would have been and there would be 568,000 fewer jobs. The biggest falls would be in coal, oil and gas and in energy intensive industries and export offset industries. But the Liberal-National policy is to increase intermittents to 40 per cent above the current level, to 28 per cent, which is more than half of Labor's. That would also be devastating.

One Nation has zero intermittents, zero renewables and zero subsidies. That's because we are the party of the worker. We are the party of the investor and the party of small-business people. Labor is no longer the party of the worker. The Greens never were and the Liberal-National coalition never were. And the Queensland Premier? I ask you: who looks after Queenslanders when you have an absurd 50 per cent renewable policy? The Queensland Premier, Annastacia Palaszczuk, has committed to Queensland having a 50 per cent renewables and intermittents target. She sneers at the plight of coalminers, farmers and all Queenslanders who use electricity—all families who use electricity. Deb Frecklington, her opponent, commits Queensland to higher levels of intermittents. Senator Canavan spins like a wind turbine, at first a climate sceptic, then, in cabinet, a believer who spoke of the anti-coal need to cut carbon dioxide from human activity. Facing the exodus of voters from the Nationals, and finding himself outside cabinet, he started murmuring for coal.

The Liberal-National coalition is split into three groups: firstly, the 'Zimmerman wets', who want to embrace Greens policy and serve United Nations strategies to achieve UN goals; secondly, the 'true Liberals and Nationals', who want to return to serving Australia, a shrinking yet nonetheless admirable group containing people like Craig Kelly and Senators Rennick, Abetz and Fierravanti-Wells; and then we have the 'somersaulters', the third group, with members like Mr Barnaby Joyce and Senator Canavan, who say one thing before entering cabinet, say the opposite in cabinet and then, after leaving cabinet, meekly try to squeeze out pro-coal words. What to believe of this assorted combination?

We have additional costs coming onboard today. They were introduced in the lower house today, I believe. The clean energy finance corporations bill was introduced, with an extra billion dollars to upgrade transmission and grid security due to destabilising intermittent wind and solar sources. That's half the cost of a new coal-fired power station, and coal-fired power stations do not need stabilising, because their power, like hydro and nuclear power, is synchronous—it's stable.

What about the cost of the Howard Liberal-National government's stated desire to comply with the UN's Kyoto climate protocol in 1996 that led to the stealing of farmers' rights to use their land—the land that the farmers paid for? In 1996 in Canberra, the Liberal Prime Minister, the National Party Deputy Prime Minister and the Liberal environment minister, Senator Robert Hill, did a partnership deal with the Queensland National Party's Premier Borbidge and Ministers Littleproud and Hobbs. A Liberal-National consortium did a deal, called a 'partnership agreement'. Then Mr Howard and his government did a deal with Premier Beattie from the Labor Party, and then Premier Bligh. On that foundation, Annastacia Palaszczuk and Jackie Trad built their latest strangling of farmers' rights to use the land that those farmers bought and owned lawfully but cannot use. Why do Queensland's Premier and Labor Party remain silent on the theft of $1½ billion each year from Queensland's electricity users due to high power prices under the corporatised Queensland electricity supply?

What a shameful mess. What we need is to build a coal-fired power station. We are pleased the Liberal-National coalition are now supporting coal—at least in words and in a feasibility study. One Nation says build the damn thing now. Get on with it. Actions speak louder than words. We invite the Liberal-National coalition to review the facts on climate and to reverse all climate policy. Stop shrieking 'climate crisis' like the Greens. Stop all destruction of our nation's vital electricity. Get real, this disallowance motion— (Time expired)

Perin Davey (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What we're seeing is a dark day for working men and women across Australia and particularly in the regions. What we see today is Labor, the party born of Central Queensland, the party born of workers, turn its back on both its history and on the contemporary workers of today. It is like their connection to their roots died along with the famed tree of knowledge. Like that tree, which was maliciously poisoned, the Labor Party is now poisoned by Greens ideology.

We now have a party born in Barcaldine, Queensland, that fantastic Central Queensland community, allowing the New South Wales Socialist Left faction to lead the Greens in a motion to deny Queenslanders jobs, to deny an entrepreneurial Indigenous enterprise an opportunity to prove the business case for those jobs and to deny the potential development of reliable and affordable power. I wonder how Senator Murray Watt—oh, that's right; he's Left, isn't he?—or Senator Nita Green—what faction is she?—feel about being told what industries they can have in their state by their New South Wales branch? It is no wonder, as referred to by my colleague Senator McKenzie, that CFMEU in Queensland have quit the Labor Left faction.

But I say that's not going far enough, because what today shows us is that the rest of Labor are being led by the nose by the Left. They are being led to side with the Greens and to disregard workers and their very roots. It is no wonder the CFMEU's Queensland mining division has vowed to stop donating to Labor and will instead fund candidates committed to a strong and viable resource industry. That's because those industries support Queensland, they support our nation and they support our economy. We have heard time and time again that our economic recovery will be led by the regions, including through forestry, agriculture and mining—the very industries Labor have turned their backs on. In these industries there are jobs. It is through these industries that we produce our key exports and bring in billions for our economy.

But Labor continue to prove they've got no regard for jobs or these industries, particularly in Queensland. The New Acland mine has been waiting for an approval to expand since 2007. There are 150 immediate, direct jobs contingent on that approval, but Labor don't care about those jobs, as they proved when they voted against a motion in this place by my colleague Paul Scarr earlier this year calling on Queensland to approve that expansion. Labor voted against that; they voted against jobs. The failure of Labor to support jobs in Queensland should be ringing alarm bells for workers across Australia. The fact that this motion is being brought on by the New South Wales socialist faction shows that the New South Wales branch also has no regard for workers.

It is no wonder the member for Hunter is quaking in his boots, when the whole of his electorate is dependent on mining and Labor are turning their backs on mining. I say to the people of Hunter: remember which party stands in this place and supports your jobs. Remember which party will ensure your job has a future. I say to the people of Queensland that, despite the fact that my colleagues Senator Matt Canavan and Senator Susan McDonald couldn't be here due to COVID travel restrictions, they stand up for your jobs, they stand up for your industries and they support your workers. Senator Paul Scarr reminded me of that fact just today, too.

Labor don't care about jobs. They don't care about the hundreds of jobs that could be created through the development of a high-energy low-emissions power plant in Central Queensland, just like they don't care about the flow-on jobs created when Queensland's commercial and industrial sectors gain access to affordable and reliable power. But we care. That is why we are funding this study to determine the feasibility of such a project. Labor should not hide behind climate change, because this party that is willing to throw workers out into the cold in the name of climate change still does not have an emissions reduction target.

Rex Patrick (SA, Centre Alliance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would ask, as coalition senators stand up, that in their contributions they answer some questions that I'm a little bit confused about. It appears that on 8 February the minister announced up to $4 million of funding for a feasibility study to Shine, and then on 10 February, two days later, asked them to make a submission for a grant. It seems out of order, and I'm hoping someone might be able to explain that. I do note that a grant has been awarded to the company, and that is available on the Commonwealth grants website, so I'm guessing that if this disallowance goes ahead that will have to be reversed—or perhaps it's contingent on the regulation not being disallowed.

I will actually be supporting this disallowance, and I won't be doing so because of the politics of the Greens or the politics of the Labor Party or in spite of the politics of the Liberal Party. I come from an engineering background, so I tend to look at these things from an engineering perspective. What I'll say is that there are three really important things that we need to have when we look at power for Australians. The first is that the power needs to be clean. I know that people on the other side may question that in some way, but I'll remind them of the history of the coalition in the proposition for an emissions intensity scheme. Then they went to a clean energy target, supported of course by Dr Finkel, and moved from there to a national energy guarantee. So, on the other side of the chamber there has always been some notion somewhere that we do need to have clean energy. So, people shouldn't stand up and suggest that there isn't a problem, because for a long period of time at least some people on the other side have recognised that there is a problem in that space.

Clean energy is important. Affordable energy is also important. We have to make sure that the energy that is supplied around the country is affordable. The last thing any of us wants is for an elderly person to not be able to turn on their heater during winter or turn on their air conditioner during summer. That's something we should all seek to avoid. And the last requirement, moving on from cleanliness and affordability, is to make sure that it's reliable. As a South Australian I'm only too mindful of the need to have reliable energy available. Just recently I've asked questions of Minister Taylor, through the minister representing him, about how many times AEMO is intervening in the South Australian energy market. The facts of the matter are that about three times a day, on average, AEMO intervenes in the market to ensure solid supply. That tells you there is a problem with renewables in respect of reliability. We're not there yet.

I just wanted to be very forensic and factual about my contribution tonight. But here's why I will be supporting the disallowance. We have a situation where we don't have that reliability, but there are mechanisms for dealing with that right now. In South Australia, we direct gas turbines to make sure the demand is met. But there's no question that, as time moves forward, we will get that reliability with renewable energy in combination with batteries and other types of energy. We will get there; there's no question of that. We're not there yet, but we will get there. It's for that reason that it is a backwards step to try and invest in coal. It has its place and it does provide stability, but it's the wrong direction. We shouldn't be moving forward with energy that we know is not clean and that is unlikely to be affordable in comparison and in circumstances where renewable energy will become reliable. So I will be supporting the disallowance motion.

Mehreen Faruqi (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support the disallowance motion and associate myself with the comments made by my Greens colleague Senator Waters from Queensland. I will say that loud and clear: she is a Greens senator from Queensland who cares about Queenslanders, who cares about the workers in Queensland, who cares that the environment they work in is safe and healthy, and who cares about a healthy planet for everyone.

This government is just shameless. I have to say that I am actually tired of rising up again and again in this chamber to speak about this government's dodgy use of public money and their refusal to act on the climate crisis. If you can't see the climate catastrophe that is staring down on us, then you have deliberately closed your eyes. We are in the middle of a climate emergency, and things are only going to get worse as this government refuses to take any meaningful action to mitigate the crisis. Bushfires, extreme heat events, drought, flooding and ecological failure of our rivers are becoming more and more common. Millions of lives are at risk. Millions of animals are dying. Across the world, people are suffering the impacts of the climate crisis. Our neighbours in the Pacific are telling us to stop digging up and shipping out coal because they are going underwater. In Pakistan, the country I grew up in, the snows on the absolutely majestic Himalayas are melting as we speak and creating havoc downstream for millions and millions of people who are being flooded every other year.

When I started teaching at the University of New South Wales about 20 years ago, I used to ask my students to imagine a time when there would be raging bushfires increasing in intensity every year, when some parts of the world would be in extreme drought and some parts of the world would experience extreme floods, and when we would have record levels of species extinctions. Do you know what? That world is upon us now, so try and do something about it. Instead of doing something about it, this government keeps making things worse by propping up some of their favourite donors—the fossil fuel industry, the coal industry, the coal seam gas industry and the gas industry—and using public money to buy election outcomes. Over and over, we hear from the fossil fuel lobby and this coal-addicted government that coal is equal to jobs and that coal is equal to cheaper electricity prices. And over and over again, that has been shown to be a lie. It does not work anymore.

The proposed Collinsville power plant is a great example of that. Even members of the government and some of the most ardent coal fans in the Labor Party have spoken against this coal-fired plant, saying that it is an economic dead end and that it doesn't stack up either environmentally or economically. Maybe it would be wise for you to listen to them. The government doesn't need a $4 million feasibility study to tell us what we already know: this is a dud. It's a bloody waste of money. Taxpayers deserves so much better from their government but, obviously, you're not going to give it to them.

When will you pull your fingers out of your ears and start listening and hearing about what people are telling you? When will you open your eyes and face the reality that is in front of us? Coal is a dead end; coal is a stranded asset. Coal is causing the climate crisis and coal kills. Have you heard of black lung disease? Do you know how much pollution coal and coal-fired power plants cause? Go and have a look—see. If you do actually care about workers, if you do care about their health and if you do care about the health of this planet and people and animals living around the world then you must wean yourselves off coal. That is the only way.

We know that our use and export of coal is killing the planet. We are the largest exporter of coal in the world. We can do much better than that. We could be exporting energy produced from hydrogen, from renewable energy. Let's come into the 21st century. We must transition to 100 per cent renewable energy and we must do it in the next decade. Why we must do it in the next decade is because if we are to have a chance of avoiding the worst of the climate catastrophe then it has to be done urgently. We must stop new coal-fired power stations and new coalmines, and phase out existing coalmines. There are alternatives; it's happening across the world. You must all have heard about renewable energy. You must all have heard about energy from hydrogen, and if you haven't then maybe you should listen more to scientists. We must leave the coal in the hole and the oil in the soil; that's the way it has to be. And it must start now.

The Greens have a plan to transition our energy system from the one we currently have, which is the oldest and the dirtiest in the world. That's where we are. We could be leaders! We could be leaders in renewable energy. We could move from the oldest and dirtiest system in the world to one of the cleanest and greenest. It would reduce pollution and it would create thousands of jobs in that process.

Government Senator:

A government senator interjecting—

Mehreen Faruqi (NSW, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We do need investment. The government needs to take responsibility for the health of the planet, for the health of Australians and for the health of the workers. We must have large-scale investment in renewable energy infrastructure and in local manufacturing.

Like Senator Patrick, I'm an engineer. I think we need a huge investment to have a renaissance of our manufacturing sector. We've seen through the COVID crisis how lacking in manufacturing we are. This is a real opportunity for us to actually start manufacturing—21st century manufacturing that is sustainable manufacturing. This is why we need to invest in renewable energy. Through that, we can create good, steady, dignified and unionised jobs for hundreds and thousands of people. That's what an emerging sustainable economy and society looks like.

The time has really come; the time is upon us. The time is here to build our way out of the economic and climate crises we find ourselves in. We don't have to choose between action on climate change and secure, dignified jobs for workers—jobs that keep workers healthy and safe. Those jobs are not in coal, those jobs are in sustainable manufacturing and renewable energy. We can wean ourselves off coal; we can stop burning coal for electricity and move to 100 per cent renewable energy. We can do that—

A government senator interjecting—

You can keep on denying that until the cows come home! That doesn't make it true. We want to move to a sustainable future for us in Australia and for everyone across the world. We want to move to this 100 per cent renewable energy future with a just transition for workers who are in the coal industry at the moment. There was an inquiry that went around regional Australia which I was part of, and people were telling us that that's what they want to do. People in the Hunter Valley were telling us that they want a just transition. They want a plan from this government until there are no options left for those communities, because we know that moving to 100 per cent renewable energy, weaning ourselves off coal, is affordable, possible and necessary.