David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Climate Change and Energy, Minister McAllister. How many households with an income of $200,000 or more will receive the $150 energy bill rebate?

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

As has been clear, our approach in providing energy bill relief has been to make sure every household gets access to this. I understand that you may have a different view about whether that is necessary, but we take the view that families across the country are under pressure and we do what we can to help. We've known that addressing the cost of living is a significant priority for this government across the entire term. It's why we've taken the steps we have: delivering tax cuts, delivering energy bill relief for households, getting wages moving again, making medicines cheaper and making it easier to see a GP. All these steps have been put in place so as to—

David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Point of order on relevance: I had no preamble. It was a very tight question. I understand their rationale. I'm just asking how many people who earn more than $200,000 a year are getting these rebates.

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

The minister has been relevant to your question.

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

We are clear that every household will receive bill relief. In addition to that, many, many businesses—around one million small businesses—will also receive relief. In the long term, we know that the transformation of the energy system is necessary to get prices under control. We came to government and faced a very serious situation in the energy system. We had almost a decade of failed energy policies—22 policies, and none of them landed.

David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On relevance: I had absolutely no preamble. I had a one-sentence question: 'How many people who earn more than $200,000 a year are receiving the rebate?' How is that relevant?

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

That's the same point of order you stood on before, and I've ruled on that. The minister is being relevant.

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

As I was indicating, we came to government under circumstances where there had been 22 failed energy policies and none of them had landed. There was significant work to do—to restore order, to restore confidence in the electricity system—and we've set about taking the necessary steps to make that happen, to restore confidence in the investment community—

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

Senator Lambie?

Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Jacqui Lambie Network) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A point of order on relevance: it's a simple question. How many people on $200,000 is this going to—

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

Senator Lambie, there is no—

Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Jacqui Lambie Network) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If you don't have a number, it's because you have not done your homework.

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

Senator Lambie, resume your seat. First of all, direct the point of order to me. You're not raising a point of order with the minister. That's the third time that point of order has been raised. The minister has answered a question and is being relevant.

Senator Lambie, resume your seat, unless you have a question towards me.

Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Jacqui Lambie Network) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have a question, if you could explain to me how that is relevant to the question. I'm sorry: I must be stupid, but perhaps you could explain the relevance to me, so that I understand your thinking, because I'm not accepting what is—

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

Senator Lambie—

Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Jacqui Lambie Network) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I just want an answer—the relevance.

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

Senator Lambie, you're not in a debate with me.

Senator Lambie, come to order!

Senator Lambie, come to order or you'll be named.

The:

Senator Pocock has asked the question. The minister has answered the question. It may not be in the terms that specifically meet your needs, but she has answered the question.

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

Senator Lambie, resume your seat! Senator McAllister, please continue.

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

Thanks, President. To say it for the third time, this is a measure that applies to all households, Senators. So, it applies to all households, irrespective of the level of income of that household. (Time expired)

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

Senator Pocock, first supplementary.

David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's incredibly disappointing, given what in the last three years we've heard about preambles and relevance. I don't know. We'll have to look at what can be done, because I don't accept that that was relevant.

Minister, how many households could have been supported to install batteries for the $7.8 billion total cost of the ongoing energy bill relief measures, and how much ongoing savings would that have given?

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

Your question acknowledges that the government is providing an additional $150 in energy bill relief, and that extends the existing bill relief arrangements to the end of 2025. And, as I indicated in response to your primary question, that means that every household will receive support to bring down their energy bills. But it is also true, Senator—and we are in agreement here—that there are other opportunities to support households to bring down their bills. Those opportunities include investments in solar at home and in batteries at home. And our energy-saving package, which we've canvassed on a number of occasions in this chamber, is doing exactly this. So, we are delivering energy saving upgrades to around 100,000 social housing residents across the country, with the Social Housing Energy Performance Initiative. We've provided $1 billion to turbocharge lending through the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, working with banks and other lenders to finance energy upgrades for 110,000 homes, and we're funding ARENA to do electrification trials.

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

Senator Pocock, second supplementary.

David Pocock (ACT, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, will the government commit to structural reform and a substantial electrification and energy efficiency package to get households off gas and substantially reduce household energy bills, rather than constant bandaid fixes?

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

Well, obviously I don't agree with the assessment Senator Pocock makes of the cost-of-living support that is being provided to every household. Our government thinks that is important. Our government thinks it is important, when households are under pressure, to provide them with support where we can. That is the approach we've taken right across the term.

But, Senator, your question seems to imply that it's an either/or, and we don't accept that, either. We do think there are opportunities to support households to build their own energy resilience and to make enduring savings on their bills. That is precisely why we've made the investments that we have, over this term, to support households to do just that. I talked about some of those in my answer to your last question. Those households are already seeing results. The amount of investment necessary for each household depends on your circumstances. But there are things families can do, and we're taking every step that we can to help them do that.