Tom French (Moore, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

There was a time when the member for New England stood for something. He was a country maverick who crossed the floor more than anyone else, a man who wouldn't take a script from anyone—not the press gallery, not the suits in Canberra and certainly not his own party. He was loud, but it came from conviction and from a genuine belief that the bush needed a fighter, and for a time he was that fighter. He still stands for something, but it's no longer the people he once championed. The conviction remains, but the compass has spun. The fight that once came from the soil now comes from the studio light. The bill before us, the so-called Repeal Net Zero Bill, is the product of that drift. It tears down; it doesn't build. It looks backwards, not forwards. It scraps the Climate Change Act, abolishes the Net Zero Economy Authority and deletes every reference to net zero it can find, as if deleting the words will stop the weather. There is no courage in it, just confusion. It's a long way from the plain-spoken pragmatism of the farmers, workers and small-business owners who actually keep the regions running.

I represent Moore, a coastal electorate where people know the value of hard work and fair reward. They know when someone is offering a fair go and when they're just selling nostalgia. The people of Moore don't want another round of arguments from last century; they want cheaper bills, steadier jobs and a government that treats clean energy as a tool, not a target. In Joondalup, small firms are cutting costs with solar. In Kingsley, retirees are counting every dollar. In Mullaloo, apprentices are wiring up industries of the future, not patching up the past. When they talk about the past, it's in words like 'shutdown' or 'decommission'.

The member for New England says net zero is pointless. He says we'll be stronger if we walk away from the world. He says renewables are future landfill. But, while people suffer through droughts, tariffs and the embarrassment of being a century behind, it's his words that seem pointless. Once the member for New England stood up for rural Australians in this chamber, but this bill gives them only an echo, distant and unclear—the sound of politics stuck in neutral. It's a squeaky-wheel performance of masculinity chasing overseas strongmen instead of shaping Australia's future here at home.

Net zero isn't ideology; it's industry. It's 33 per cent of Australian homes now topped with rooftop solar. It's farmers earning carbon credits to diversify their income. It's regional towns like Geraldton and Kalbarri turning wind and sun into wages and opportunity. Since Labor came to government, renewable generation has risen nearly 30 per cent. Investment hit $12.7 billion last year, including $9 billion for new, large-scale projects. Over four million homes now produce their own power—the highest per capita in the world. That's not ideology; that's the Australian instinct to get on with it.

The National Party, once a party of practical men and women of the land, has walked away from net zero entirely. In doing so they've walked away from their own communities' economic future. Instead of backing farmers and regional workers, they have backed fantasies. Instead of standing up for regional opportunity, they have surrendered to political nostalgia. Every time they turn their backs on net zero they turn their backs on regional jobs and investment.

Yes, the member for New England once stood up for the bush. He stood for independence, decency and the right to have a go. But this bill is not that. It's not maverick; it's mimicry. It's not rebellion but retreat—a retreat that would leave this country he loves weaker, poorer and more divided. Now we see it plainly: the retreat is complete. Australia deserves better. The bush deserves better. This parliament must do better. I oppose this bill because standing up for regional Australia means standing up its future, not dragging it back into someone else's past.

See this speech in context