Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A letter has been received from Senator O'Sullivan:

Pursuant to standing order 75, I propose that the following matter of public importance be submitted to the Senate for discussion:

Under the Albanese Government all aspects of energy generation are off track, with Labor's 82 per cent renewables by 2030 target way behind schedule and running at less than one third of the pace required last year, while gas prices are spiking following the energy regulators risk notice warning of gas shortages impacting Australians right throughout winter.

Is the proposal supported?

More than the number of senators required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

With the concurrence of the Senate, I shall ask the clerks to set the clock in line with informal arrangements made by the whips.

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

Under the Albanese government all aspects of energy generation are off track, with Labor's target of 82 per cent renewables by 2030 way behind schedule and running at less than one-third of the pace required last year, while gas prices are spiking following the energy regulator's risk notice warning of gas shortages impacting Australians right throughout winter. This is the matter that we are considering right now and that I bring before the Senate for consideration. This is an urgent matter because Australians are facing higher prices and we have an energy grid that is at risk of failure.

Yesterday in question time the Prime Minister refused to be upfront with the Australian people in relation to the costs of Labor's renewable-only rollout and, here in the Senate, Senator Wong and Minister Gallagher were no better. We asked genuine questions, questions that deserved answers, and we got nothing. They avoided answering the questions, particularly when it came to the cost of their program and the cost of their rollout. We know that it is unaffordable and that those costs are being passed on to the Australian consumer, to energy users across the country. It doesn't matter whether it's a household or a business. If it's a business, those costs are passed on to every single Australian. When asked a very simple, straightforward question, the government did what they always do. They avoided responsibility and blamed the opposition. You would think that for a simple question like, 'What is the total system cost of achieving the Anthony Albanese Labor government's 82 per cent renewable energy target by 2030?' you would get a simple answer. It's a simple question; we should get a straightforward answer. But we didn't. The Australian people deserve better. They should be getting straightforward answers, but they're not.

Princeton University senior research scientist Dr Chris Greig had a simple, straightforward answer. He estimated in his report that the capital cost of the energy transition following a similar pathway to the government's current plan would be between $1.3 trillion and $1.5 trillion. This is from a senior research scientist at Princeton University. This is serious. It's not a flimsy report. It's not someone you should not take seriously; this is someone who should be taken seriously—a cost of $1.3 to $1.5 trillion. And, as I said, those costs simply get passed on to Australian consumers. That's why Australians are paying more.

The Albanese government and Mr Albanese himself took to the last election a promise that energy bills would be reduced by $275. He said it nearly 100 times throughout the election campaign. But have you seen that reduction? Of course you haven't. In fact, we've seen energy bills go up in some markets by over $1,000. Now they've put in some subsidies that can be applied to your bill, but that's not the long-term structural change that is needed.

Mr Dutton has a plan that he's put forward to see energy prices reduce. We're not going to rush to see coal and coal-fired power stations removed from the market. We're not going to rush to see this transition to a renewables-only approach. No: we want to see a balanced approach, particularly where gas becomes a dominant generator of electricity. But we need to have exploration. We need to have new gasfields, particularly here on the east coast. AEMO have said we'll be in some serious trouble if new gas is not provided into the market. If the winter continues to be as cold as it's been, we're going to see a reduction and we're possibly even going to see a limitation of power in this market. This is of great concern to Australians.

This government is off track. In fact, it's worse than that: the train has not even left the station. They're hopeless. Bring on the election as soon as we can so we can deal with this lot over here.

Anthony Chisholm (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's a pleasure to follow Senator O'Sullivan, who made an interesting contribution. I saw an obsession with costing our policies, yet they didn't cost their own policies that they released last week—well, I wouldn't quite call it 'policy'; I'd call it a bit of a half-baked press conference where they announced support for nuclear power. We know that the history of nuclear power is that it is more expensive. It does take an enormous amount of time to deliver, and that is why what is coming from those opposite is so dangerous. I'm not someone who is philosophically opposed to nuclear power, but I am opposed to economic vandalism, and what was announced last week by the opposition actually resembles economic vandalism, and that is why it is so dangerous for the Australian community.

We were elected to government on a platform to actually take action, to implement a renewables plan, to work constructively with states and territories. We saw from those opposite 10 years of delay and denial, and the damage that did. That's what we've been overcoming since we came to government. We've been working really hard to do that, and our record points to that. On that record, I should start with the $300 off power bills for every household that will begin in six days time. We know that energy bills are challenging for so many families out there, which is why it's important that the government has acted again in this budget.

But our reliable renewables plan is supported by experts and is based on evidence from the CSIRO and AEMO that renewable firm batteries and pumped hydro is actually the lowest-cost plan to build new capacity into the grid. That is why we are pursuing it. Since the election our plan has delivered a 25 per cent increase in renewables in the grid, a record investment in batteries and storage, approval for more than 50 renewable projects around the country, and 280 gigawatts of generation and storage projects in the pipeline—4.5 times the capacity of the grid today. As I travel around—being the Assistant Minister for Regional Development, I spend a lot of time in regional areas—I see the opportunity these projects are providing to so many communities across the country and also, importantly, the support and confidence it is giving those communities so that they know they can have a brighter future.

The week after the budget the Treasurer and I were in Gladstone and were talking about a hydrogen project there that will be powered by renewable energy. So, we know that these things already happening, that it's generating jobs; it's generating investment. All that the plan from those opposite is going to do is put those things in doubt. It's going to set them back. It's going to make those businesses second guess whether they have the confidence to go through with this. You have to remember their record in government—the 22 policies. They spent $3 million on a study into a coal-fired power station in Collinsville. Where is the study? Senator McDonald, do you know where the study is? We never saw the study. That shows you what their priority was in government. They don't actually believe in climate change; they don't actually believe in renewable energy. They will do anything they can to stop and delay and not let the best and cheapest form of technology be implemented. That's the damage it's done.  

You only have to look at the evidence since they made the announcement last week. This is the Nationals leading the Liberals. Today we heard Senator Canavan say that he thinks they should roll back and not support net zero. That is at the heart of their policy. They don't want to see the plan we have implemented, that has the support of experts, and that should be dealt with in a bipartisan manner. They want to take us back to the Dark Ages, to the dark old days of the coalition government, when they did nothing. They had culture wars with the states. They didn't work constructively with them, and our country was worse off as a result. What I want to say to the Australian people is that, since we got elected, we've gone about implementing a plan, working constructively with states and territories, and we are making progress. We're seeing more renewable investment. We're seeing industry adapt and ensure they can get the renewable capacity they need to support their industry and business, and we're working constructively with states and territories to deliver on that.

There will be a clear contrast at this election between a government that has a track record of investing in renewables and doing what it can to alleviate the pressure on household power bills and those opposite who don't want to see any progress made on renewables and who want to take us back to the dark old days and do nothing about capacity for 15 years, let alone abandon the net zero ambitions of this country.

Dorinda Cox (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm not surprised that this MPI has been brought to this chamber by Senator O'Sullivan today. What we heard this morning from Minister King was that gas isn't making it to the eastern seaboard because the pipes aren't there, the infrastructure is not there. No-one in the Australian public should that that's true. Eighty per cent of the gas from this country goes overseas for export.

In my home state of Western Australia—and Senator O'Sullivan should know this—the Western Australian parliament have looked into the domestic gas arrangement from the Burrup Peninsula on behalf of Woodside. They're not even fulfilling the 15 per cent they're supposed to under that agreement without any consequences. So they're pumping it offshore, fracking and sending it overseas. They're selling it on, in fact. When we sell it to the Japanese, they're selling our gas to other countries. While we're in a cost-of-living crisis and Australians are doing it tough, the gas cartels of this country are rubbing their hands together. In fact, Minister King, the Minister for Resources, was asked this morning, 'Are you going to pull the trigger on the mechanism that this government created not to put Australians in hardship?' They're having a conversation, and it's a bit of a smokescreen about nuclear.

Nuclear is a pipeline dream. The thing about that is that it's such a serious conversation we should be having about nuclear because it's about safety in Australian communities, in the seven communities that they've picked off the map and said, 'We'll go there, and we'll go there for nuclear reactors.' It's the most expensive form of energy. It is not going to help Australians tomorrow today who are doing it hard with their electricity bills. It is not. The 82 per cent renewable target, yes, great—43 per cent by 2030—but they're still opening up offshore gas fields. Minister King and Minister Plibersek are still opening gas fields and approving coalmines in this country. This wreck and delay strategy is what's wearing absolutely thin. It's wearing thin for Australians that are doing it hard. And if the two majors cared about that, they wouldn't be on a unity ticket right now creating this smoke screen that is leading to the price hikes in this country and the energy shortage. It's time to join the 21st century.

Susan McDonald (Queensland, National Party, Shadow Minister for Resources) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is an incredibly important topic and I thank Senator O'Sullivan for bringing this matter to the Senate for debate. Despite the government coming to the last election promising a reduction in power prices, Australian consumers—whether they be households or businesses—have seen nothing but skyrocketing prices. There are jobs and businesses leaving our shores because they can no longer afford the cost of doing business in this country. I'm not just telling you that; we're seeing it from public companies who are making those announcements; we're seeing an increase in the number of businesses that are struggling and in liquidation numbers; and we're seeing it with the number of businesses and households that are just saying they can't afford these bills.

Of course, it started in Queensland, the state that had the lowest energy prices thanks to the introduction of coal-fired power stations a long time ago, when the Labor government of the day introduced a 45c-per-kilowatt subsidy for putting solar panels on your roof. Every public servant in town who heard about it had them on their roof. That was terrific. A lot of farmers put them out in their fields. But what it did is increase a billion dollars a year to the costs in Queensland. That had already started happening. We've seen more renewables rolled out, but what we've also seen is increasing prices.

It is time that the government came clean that every time they say renewables are the cheapest source of electricity, that is a lie, because they never factor in transmission lines. They never factor in the terrible price to communities. When I was in Rockhampton the other day, I had landholders telling me of the confidentiality agreements they have to sign with offshore, big, international, foreign-owned wind farm proponents—the very people who will provide no manufacturing jobs in Australia because all the wind turbines are manufactured offshore, as are the solar panels. There are no manufacturing jobs here. There are no royalties coming here from electricity generation. There is no investment. Instead, it's dividing local communities into those who have—those with the wind farms on their properties—and those who have not—those living right next door but get all the downside and the impact on their roads. That is the government's mantra—to destroy regional communities without a care, apart from continuing to talk about how renewable energy will bring down prices.

More urgent is the terrible intervention into the gas market. This government, nearly two years ago, intervened in our gas market so dramatically that we have seen investment fleeing Australia. That's not just investment into big projects—it's not big business. It's into the small businesses regionally. It's into the well-paid jobs that Australians are missing out on. It's the royalties and company taxes that the Australia of the future will miss out on. This is such economic irresponsibility that it's hard to know where to begin. If you look at Australia's balance sheet, it is driven by coal, iron ore and gas, and the only thing that changes is that order. And when you start ripping the legs out from underneath gas, you tell coal that they're surplus to requirements, and who knows what's next for iron ore, what you do is damage Australia's balance sheet, future cash flow, and ability to pay for schools and roads and hospitals and all the things that we enjoy in this country. That is the direct result of this crazy mishandling of energy policy that is threatening reliability and threatening costs.

I love that every time the government talks about their payment to help with electricity bills, they are robbing Peter to pay Paul. They are putting their hand into your pocket, taking out some of your hard-earned tax dollars, and giving it back to everybody else in the community. There's no checking of whether you deserve it, whether you're struggling, or whether you're somebody who owns multiple homes. No, they're just handing it to everybody because there is no fiscal responsibility. It's just: create a problem and then rob it from Peter to pay Paul to try to solve it.

So you're absolutely right, Senator Chisholm: there is going to be a clear contrast at the next election. There's going to be a contrast between the government that is driving us up onto the rocks and a government that actually has a plan, which is in line with other major economies in the world, to reduce emissions and have reliable, affordable electricity.

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

For those watching at home, we're debating a motion the Liberals-Nationals coalition introduced proposing a matter of public importance. The motion complains that, 'Labor's 82 per cent renewables by 2030 target is way behind schedule.' I have two responses to that: 'Who cares!' and 'Good!' Renewables are the collection of wind, solar, hydrogen, battery, pumped hydro and other scams that parasitic billionaires own and pump up with billions more in taxpayer subsidies. Every new solar panel and every new wind turbine installed represents another increase in Australians' power bills.

I commend the Liberals and Nationals for further opening the debate on nuclear, which One Nation has always advocated. I cannot abide, though, the insistence that we do nuclear so that we can meet net zero targets. Net zero is economic suicide, human catastrophe and environmental disaster. The only thing that can truly bring Australian power bills down is coal and, in North Queensland, hydro. To comply with net zero, the coalition's proposal is to forcibly acquire coal-fired power stations, shut them down and replace them with nuclear. We don't need to end coal to do nuclear. We can do both. Why would we stop using coal here while we ship hundreds of millions of tonnes of coal to China and other countries every year. The United Nations World Economic Forum net zero target: that's why. A foreign, unelected bureaucratic organisation is telling Australians what we can and can't do.

There's only one solution: tell the foreign, unelected organisations and their billionaire donors, like Bill Gates, to bugger off. Australia is one of the most resource-rich countries in the world. We should be using every bit of these resources right here for the benefit of Australians and especially for getting back to being the source of the world's cheapest electricity. Put Australians first.

Tony Sheldon (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm not sure about the billionaires in Tasmania with hydro and renewables; the last time I looked, that wasn't the case. Putting that to one side, what this debate is really about is the fantasy about the nuclear 'policy'—the nuclear fantasy from those opposite. As we saw, the nuclear plan from those opposite is more of a budget black hole than it is a policy, because it actually turns around and takes additional costs from every Australian's pocket. They have to turn around and have money taken out: $1,000 extra per week. That's the increase in their tax bills as a result of the energy fiasco on the 23rd energy policy from those opposite. What's that energy policy actually based on? It's based on the fact that they can't reach agreement in their own caucus. It's about lying to the Australian public because they're trying to maintain their own cohesion whilst turning around and still arguing about the policy being incorrect. So not only are they not giving us answers but they haven't got a consistent position across their party.

The fact is that they've got person after person coming forward and saying that this policy is a crock. We've seen frontbencher after frontbencher and member of parliament after member of parliament contradicting each other. We saw it in the statement that 'the local community is going to be consulted'. The deputy leader was then contradicted by the Leader of the Nationals, because the local public where these reactors are going to be placed are not going to be consulted. We then look at the arguments put forward, and some of the decisions made, by the likes of the opposition leader in the Senate, Senator Birmingham. The opposition leader—Mr Dutton's own frontbencher—Senator Birmingham, spoke in favour of renewables, saying that they've become more cost competitive in their own right and are an important part of the mix. But then we're going to hear person after person get up here and make contradictory arguments. It is that simple.

They haven't got their act together, and if this policy they're putting forward, the $600 billion, does go forward—I used to watch that show called The Six Million Dollar Manhe'll be the $600 billion man. But, unlike The Six Million Dollar Man, it's not going to be entertaining because everyone will be paying more for their energy. They're going to be putting on more costs and putting more on their bills. There will be more consequences for families that are trying to deal with the cost of living.

Then there is this other fantasy that says that workers who have been working in coal-fired electricity generating facilities are going to somehow miraculously be moved over to these new facilities run by nuclear energy. The fact is that those workers need support now, because the coal industry is already moving out and coal-fired power stations are already getting closed down. Those workers don't need to wait till 2035, under the best-case scenario, not the reality scenario. Even those opposite admit that it'll be 2035.

So they've already decided that they're going to abandon communities to higher prices, no job transition and no dealing with the reality of climate change so that they can bring every sort of crazy idea that exists within their caucus and make them all feel at home whilst they actually deliver an economic bombshell to the entire Australian community. It's a bombshell in your home budget, it's a bombshell in your business budget and it's a bombshell across the Australian economy. It's the black hole of policies, where this nuclear money will just get ploughed in and ploughed in, and it will come out of the pockets of everybody's in this country.

Quite clearly, the only thing we can see that's more mysterious than these nuclear reactors is Area 51, because they actually aren't telling us what the policy is going to do. They're not telling us what the costs are. They can't quite work out how many nuclear reactors they're going to have and what models of reactors they're going to have on each site. They can't work out what the gigawatts are going to be. They can't work it out. They tell us that they have made the decision to commit every Australian in this country to spending $600 billion, and they still haven't worked out the answers. It's a fantasy.

Ross Cadell (NSW, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So many speakers before this have made this a battle between renewables and nuclear. It is not that; it is far more than that. It is about certainty and credibility as we go forward. What we've seen is net zero reduction achievements of zero or 0.2 or nothing over the last two years of this government, which goes to the crux of this matter: they're not doing it; they're not getting on with it.

When we go to Senate estimates and they talk about their 43 per cent renewable target, we hear evidence from their own departments and their own ministers that says their goal is 38 per cent with extensions for another five per cent. Let's look at those extensions. They're the energy emissions bill, which was reduced, so that's actually not going to achieve what they want. Then there's the Safeguard Mechanism. That's not going to achieve what they want. And they're rolling out power for the 38 per cent more slowly than they ever thought possible. So their policy is not working. The results are on the scoreboard. There is very little reduction in emissions, and the progress towards other energy is going ever more slowly.

Mums and dads at home want to have certainty—short of putting their kids in hamster wheels to power the household. They know that, when they flick the light on, they'll have it there. They want to keep the fridge on to keep the food good. Small businesses need to know that they'll be able to keep operating and that they'll have the power to continue their businesses. Manufacturing needs certainty. What has caused that certainty to fail? It is the policies of this government.

When you look at the renewables rollout, it is being rushed, it is hodgepodge and it is amateurish. That sums up so many actions of this government. But when we've asked have a committee to look at how we can do the renewables rollout better—which we've done 10 times here—the answer has always been no. If we were able to look at better sites, better methods for landholders and better ways to roll out transmission lines, that would give the certainty we want. But all we hear from the other side is nuclear versus renewables. They all have a place in creating certainty for mums and dads here. Everything has a place in creating the energy we need.

Primarily, we want to do it as cleanly as possible and as cheaply as possible—we owe that to the Australian people—but we need that certainty, and this plan is failing. The energy rollout under Labor is failing, because they rush to communities and don't consult properly, so there are legal challenges and other impediments. There are community protests. We're seeing that in the Illawarra and in Port Stephens.

The government talk about nuclear not being viable. I don't want to make this one thing, but there are 440 nuclear plants in the world—including some dodgy Russian ones. Let's be honest about that, but they exist. When the government talk about green hydrogen production facilities, there are none. When they talk about floating substations for floating offshore wind, there are none—zero, an integer less than one. So the only hypothetical things we are talking about are the energy sources in Labor's policy. They want to build approximately 200 floating offshore wind constructions off the Illawarra and Port Stephens, on one site. In the world, there are fewer than 20. Five of them are powering gas and fuel rigs off the Scandinavian coast. Five are up in Scotland, at the Hywind facility, and they are averaging $14,000 per megawatt. That is the cost of what we're talking about here. But this government, which has achieved so very little so far, thinks it can do it for five. Forget inflation and all these other things.

So what we're saying is not only that the reduction target is off but that getting to that figure of 82 per cent renewables, the very thing that Senator O'Sullivan is talking about here, is not going to happen. Only one group of people in this building has had the courage to point out this isn't going to happen, and that is the group over on this side, including Senator O'Sullivan and Peter Dutton in the other house. They are saying we aren't going to get there. Labor should come clean and say we are not going to reach 82 per cent renewables by 2030 or get the emission targets by 2030, and the reason is that they are not competent. They have dropped the ball. They are messing around. They're great at saying what they're going to do or what we're going to do, but they aren't good at doing what they're meant to be doing, and the people who will suffer are the mums and dads at home and the employees in businesses that won't have sure power. We all need to get together to run renewables better. We need renewables in the mix, but it has to be done better, and we need to get an energy system that works.