Matt O'Sullivan (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by ministers to questions without notice asked by Opposition senators today.

Israel has been a close and dear friend of Australia for decades. The Australia-Israel bilateral relationship has been one of the more important pillars in Australia's international relations since the end of the Second World War. It should be remembered that Australia was one of 37 countries that voted in favour of admitting Israel into the United Nations. Even before 1949, Australia's connection to the Jewish homeland dated back to the Great War, which saw Australia's involvement in pushing back the Ottoman Empire, as part of the Sinai and Palestine campaign. Therefore, it is very disappointing—indeed, concerning—that the Albanese Labor government has made the decision to reverse the previous government's decision to no longer continue to recognise West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. The decision was rushed, was not considered properly and was reckless. Even after reassurances to stakeholders from senior Labor government ministers that there will be no difference in the party's policies, they have still taken this decision and misled the Australian people and, indeed, the Jewish community.

Mr Dreyfus claimed on 6 March 2022, ahead of the May election, that, across domestic politics, Australia spoke with one voice. Mr Burns, the member for Macnamara, said on 18 March 22, also ahead of the May election, that, irrespective of who formed government, the Jewish community should feel proud that their interests would be safeguarded. Despite these pre-election assurances, on 17 October media reported that the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade website had removed references to the recognition of West Jerusalem as Israel's capital and the commitment to move the embassy from Tel Aviv. Then, later that day, a spokesperson for foreign minister Senator Wong told media that the former government had made the decision to recognise West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Stakeholders, including in the Australian Jewish community and Israel's ambassador to Australia, were also assured that same day by the minister's office that there was no change. But less than 24 hours later, on 18 October, the foreign minister announced at a press conference that Australia would reverse the recognition of West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

Labor's announcement occurred on the Jewish holiday, the day of Simchat Torah, and just two weeks before a heavily contested Israeli election. The Australian government failed to consult with the Australian Jewish community. Indeed, the Israeli ambassador to Australia and Israel's government found out about the announcement from media. Israel's Prime Minister Lapid said:

In light of the way this decision was made … we can only hope that the Australian government manages other matters more seriously and professionally.

The member for Macnamara apologised to the Jewish community for the timing and handling of this appalling announcement. Will the Prime Minister do the same?

The Middle East is and remains one of the most strategically important places on the planet. The coalition remains committed to our longstanding position that Australia remains a strong supporter of the two-state solution in which Israel and a future Palestine state coexist in peace and security within internationally recognised borders. So I urge the Albanese government to apologise to Israeli Prime Minister Lapid and undo this unwise decision. Lasting peace between Israel and its neighbours is in the interests of every peace-loving member of the international community. After all, we are all God's children. The fact that Jerusalem is the capital is not just an opinion; it's a fact.

Louise Pratt (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The opposition has risen to take note of answers to all the questions they asked of all our ministers today. And it's little wonder, given how they've struggled to find any political or tangible ground on which to mount a political case on any issue today, whether it's the recognition of West Jerusalem, whether it's the Rockhampton ring road, whether it's Medibank and cybersecurity or whether it's power prices. I'm going to start today with power prices, because it is probably the issue of most significant importance to most Australians.

The government has been working to grapple with rising energy costs, unlike those opposite, from whom we saw some 22 energy policies in half a dozen years and as many ministers. Those opposite might like to push aside the fact that they didn't deal with any of these underlying issues when it came to household energy costs and simply say, 'Well, what are you going to do about it?' The simple fact is that we have outlined a very clear platform and a very clear set of energy policies which will create certainty for energy producers, will create certainty for energy producers who are producing renewable energy, will create certainty for industry and, most importantly, will stabilise the system for households. In stabilising the system for households, we are able to look to starting to manage rising energy costs.

Many Australians have actually seen their energy costs go down if they've been fortunate enough to have been able to directly invest in renewable energy, such as rooftop solar, in their own households. It's this kind of individual household vision that we know we need to embrace as a whole nation. It is, of course, not without its complexity, which is why we need a suite of policies, such as Rewiring the Nation, our electric vehicle policies and a whole range of policies on which we will get more detail in tonight's budget. These policies are playing a key role and will continue to play a key role into the future in managing household energy costs.

There is, of course, a massive tension right across Australian households which are struggling with the rising cost of living. I know we will be very mindful of this in this budget, but, when the opposition seeks to ask questions about power prices and the Australian Energy Regulator, it's very apparent that they have little regard for their own record and the lack of attention that they have given this incredibly important issue.

We are part of a government on this side that will deal responsibly with the mess we have before us in energy markets. Our response is not to try and hide price increases, as those opposite did. What we saw from those opposite on their watch was, in fact, Mr Taylor hiding those costs from the electorate right before the election. He didn't dare show Australians the data about their very real household energy costs rising. Is it little wonder that those opposite would now like to take the legacy of those price increases which happened on their watch and which households still feel the pain of today and try and cast the blame and legacy for that on our shoulders? We are here for transparency and to address those underlying issues in our energy markets and energy production.

Claire Chandler (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of the answers given by the foreign minister in relation to the appalling decision to insult one of our international partners and allies by refusing to recognise its capital. It speaks volumes that, in relation to the decision of the Labor government to refuse to recognise the capital of Israel, their announcement was warmly welcomed by not one but two prescribed terrorist organisations. Palestinian Islamic Jihad called it a courageous step and a victory. Hamas welcomed Labor's announcement, calling it a step in the right direction. To make things worse, the Israeli government was given no advance warning whatsoever that the Labor government would refuse to recognise their capital.

The decision was, effectively, announced via the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade's website. Then, the government spent a day denying that anything had actually changed. Now Senator Wong, in her answer today, says that she had made clear that Labor would take this action. But the fact is that less than 24 hours before making this decision her office was telling the Israeli ambassador and Jewish stakeholders that no such decision had been made. Yet the very next day, on an important Jewish holiday, the government revealed that it had indeed decided to refuse to recognise West Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. The handling of this announcement was nothing short of atrocious, but it is the substance of the decision which is wrong, unhelpful and insulting, and that is why it has been welcomed by two terrorist groups and met with shock by a friend and an ally.

The capital of Israel, according to Israel, is Jerusalem. The idea that Australia should reject Israel's acknowledgement of its own capital is wrong. It does not assist or help the peace process, and it diminishes Australia for our government to refuse to recognise the capital of a friend and ally. The coalition opposes the decision made by the government and supports Australia's continued recognition of West Jerusalem as Israel's capital.

Australia is of course a strong supporter of a peaceful two-state solution. As has been pointed out by many in recent days, there is no prospect whatsoever that a two-state solution would require the state of Israel to abandon West Jerusalem. The Labor government is wrong to suggest that Australia should deny recognition of Israel's capital until there is a two-state solution, because doing so does not in any way advance that peaceful solution. To the contrary, it can only serve to embolden terror organisations like Hamas and the Palestinian Islamic Jihad.

There is a long list of serious questions to be asked and answered about the making and the announcement of this decision. Aside from Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad, whose interests were served by the making of this decision? Who altered the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade's website to remove recognition of West Jerusalem as Israel's capital? On what basis did they do so, given media reports that a cabinet decision on this matter was made after the website had already been altered?

This is a Labor government that is yet to find time to apply sanctions in relation to human rights abuses in Xinjiang, that is yet to find the time to take any diplomatic action in response to the mass murder of women and children in Iran and that has not announced any action to have the Iranian regime removed from the UN Commission on the Status of Women but that does have time to sit around the cabinet table and decide to refuse to recognise the capital city of an ally and our partner.

Like I said at the start of my remarks, it is an incredibly disappointing decision by the Labor government. The process was wrong and the decision was wrong. I know that I and many of my colleagues look forward to holding the government to account for this atrocious decision.

Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I too rise to take note of answers given during question time today. I'm also going to speak, as did my colleague, on the question that Senator Duniam asked Senator Wong with regard to electricity prices.

We know that there's been a decade of denial and chaos in energy policy. We know there were 22 energy policies in the nine years of the previous government, and we know that none of those were really acted on. I was a bit surprised that this question actually came from Senator Duniam because Senator Duniam, as a Tasmanian senator, must be aware of the great announcement that Mr Bowen made last week with regard to the Marinus Link, which involves a cooperation between the Tasmanian Liberal Premier and the federal government. It's going to be great for Tasmania, which is a really important issue, and I'll come back to it in a minute.

To get back to the nine years of the previous government, we've taken the stand that we will deal responsibly with the mess that was left to us in the energy market—the mess we inherited from the other side. So we won't be doing things like the former energy minister, who I think is now the current shadow Treasurer, did. He not only knew that electricity prices were skyrocketing but he also ordered that that information be hidden from the Australian people before the election. I think that speaks volumes about the other side having not been honest with the Australian people. I want to clarify that the member for Hume actually amended the industry code for electricity retailers on 6 April, which was four days before the election was called, to delay the release of information of increases in the default market offered for New South Wales, Queensland and South Australia till after the election. He hid that. It's really well known everywhere that the previous government left Australia overexposed and underdone: overexposed to international fossil fuel markets; underdone on the cheapest form of new energy, firmed renewables.

Our plan, as I said, is to take a steady approach. We've already started working on that. Only last week Minister Bowen, in regard to us trying to get more renewables into the system, made some announcements, and I'll talk about a couple of those. Marinus Link: more than $2.5 billion will go into Marinus Link. There will be access to a concessional loan from Rewiring the Nation through the Clean Energy Finance Corporation for approximately 80 per cent of the project cost of Marinus Link, with the additional 20 per cent to be an equity investment shared equally, as I said, between the Commonwealth, the Tasmanian and, because Victoria is linked in, the Victorian parliaments. That will get this critical project off the ground.

This project will build two undersea transmission cables connecting Tasmania and Victoria. It will mean an estimated 1,400 jobs in my home state of Tasmania, 1,400 jobs in Victoria and up to $4.5 billion in positive net market benefits. Marinus Link is expected to cut at least 140 million tonnes of CO2 to 2050, the equivalent of taking approximately one million cars off the road. Yet we get sniping from that side, because there are a lot of sore losers on that side. We certainly see that in every question time: the interjections, the sniping—from not all of them, I'll admit. Certainly, from where I sit here in the second row, I can hear a lot of them, particularly in the front row and over in that area. I don't think they have yet come to accept that they are now the opposition. I think a number of them like to snipe away at anything, and this was another way of doing it.

Jacinta Nampijinpa Price (NT, Country Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

ator NAMPIJINPA PRICE () (): I rise to take note of the answer from the Minister representing the Prime Minister with regard to the Rockhampton Ring Road. We are beginning to see a pattern emerge here of this government's continual backflipping on commitments that are vital to projects in the regions. For Senator Wong to attempt to belittle the former coalition government's $1 billion-plus commitment to the Rockhampton Ring Road as a non-budgeted, undefined commitment when it had already gone to tender is a huge insult. It's an insult to the businesses and to the families of Rockhampton. Labor's delaying of federal funding for the Rockhampton Ring Road is very distressing for the community and driving uncertainty for businesses. The community is crying out for this critical infrastructure project. Businesses in the area now have to hope to win work in the short to medium term for the ring-road.

Labor members across all levels of government, including local government and state government, must demand that Anthony Albanese deliver this much-needed funding for the Rockhampton region. The project would have delivered 17.4 kilometres of new roadway, incorporating 18 bridges totalling six kilometres in length. The new ring-road would have reduced congestion and improved safety for Rockhampton by providing an alternative route, especially for heavy vehicles. But this insult to local businesses and to their families demonstrates that this government has no qualms about abandoning the regions when the regions need them the most.

It is deeply concerning for me as a representative of the Northern Territory because of the commitments that have been made to the Northern Territory. It is regional Australia that supports the entire nation in energy production, agriculture and food, yet this government continues to break promises and, instead, is making life harder for those in the regions. So I am now concerned: what else is this government prepared to slash for the regions in this up and coming budget?

The Outback Way, linking industries and tourism from Queensland, through the Northern Territory, over to Western Australia is a vital piece of infrastructure, going forward, to three regions. Do the transport logistics hubs that support our resources sector, not only for the Northern Territory but for the entire nation, now hang in the balance? These hubs would support jobs for Alice Springs, Tennant Creek, Katherine and the communities in-between, where some of our most marginalised Australians live, where some of our most marginalised Australians require opportunities to benefit their lives as well as those in the regions who are, like all other Australians, facing increases to their electricity bills.

We've heard another promise—we heard it over and over again in the lead-up to the election—of $275 being slashed from everyday Australians' electricity bills: another promise down the gurgler. So I'm deeply concerned for the regions, for the Northern Territory, for some of the places that are out of sight and out of mind to the rest of Australia. Make no mistake, this budget will be propping up the cities, propping up those who already have availability of services and opportunities, and it will be propping them up at the expense of those in the regions.

This is not a happy time, going forward, for regional Australia. I'm sure that will be evidenced later tonight, when we bear witness to how the regions are going to miss out.

Question agreed to.