Pat Conroy (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker; you are ruling with an even hand there, and I appreciate that. I am happy to take interjections because it shows just how intellectually bankrupt they are. They are intellectually bankrupt. The truth is that wholesale energy prices have doubled under their watch because they cannot arrive at a rational energy and climate change policy—and they have one in front of them right now: a clean energy target. That is not ideal from our point of view; we would prefer an emissions intensity scheme because the cost of abatement under an EIS is lower and, quite frankly, I suspect the impact on electricity prices would be greater under an EIS, but, nevertheless, we are prepared to compromise, in an effort to get a bipartisan settlement and take the politics out of this, and embrace a CET. But the Prime Minister and his minister for energy cannot get it through their party room because the member for Hughes and his allies control the party room. We saw a ridiculous party room meeting last week. With due respect to my colleague the member for Port Adelaide, over there sits the real shadow minister for energy and climate change, the member for Hughes. He led the party revolt last week in a three-hour party room meeting, where 22 speakers spoke in opposition to a clean energy target—because they are economically bankrupt. They have no idea about economic policy. They would rather go back to the glory days of the late 19th century, where we had industrialisation.

The truth is that industry desperately need policy certainty. They are crying out for policy certainty. They need a fair signal to drive investment and they have said, and the modelling confirms, that, if you have certainty, you will drive a wave of investment in the energy sector that will reduce electricity prices against a business-as-usual case. If those on the other side are really interested in getting electricity prices down—and they should be if they want to represent their communities for once—they should be embracing a clean energy target or an EIS to provide certainty to industry and let industry do what they are best at: investing in new generation around this country. But they have walked away from that.

Instead, we have this proposition that somehow the federal government is going to get into the business of building power stations in this country. That is a very suspect notion. I will be very interested to see what the Australian Energy Market Operator comes forward with at the end of the year. I know the member for Dawson is very keen for a new coal fired power station in Central Queensland or northern Queensland. That will only ever be built with billions of dollars of government subsidies—because that is what they are about over there. They are the party of subsidies. To be frank, that is the only way that a coal fired power station will ever be built in this country again. Bloomberg New Energy Finance, the experts in energy forecasting, have come forward with what industry says it costs to build a new power station in this country. They have gone to the banks and the generators and said, 'What will it cost to build a new power station in this country?' What do the generators say? For coal fired power they think it would be around $130 to $150 a megawatt hour. That is what the generators are saying. What do they say about a new wind power station? It would be $55 to $60 a megawatt hour. That is what is being built right now.

See this speech in context