Jim Chalmers (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

Thanks to the member for Sturt for the question but also for the helpful role that the member is playing already in our climate and economic policies as a relatively new member of this place. The member for Sturt understands, and we understand, that the transition to cleaner and cheaper, more reliable energy is a golden economic opportunity for our country, for our economy and for our people as well. Our economic agenda is all about making the most of this big economic transformation to net zero.

We know that what's making the electricity network less reliable is the ageing coal fired part of the network. As it becomes less reliable and as more and more of those generators come out of the system, the onus is on any responsible government to replace it with cleaner and cheaper, more reliable energy. That's why, when we released our 2035 targets, we put out the Treasury modelling that supported the decisions that we have been making to get that cleaner and cheaper, more reliable energy into the system.

We know that, when you provide that certainty and you provide that clarity, then investors can invest in the energy that we desperately need in our economy and in our communities. That's what an orderly transition is all about. The Treasury modelling concluded that the only thing worse than a disorderly transition to net zero is the policy position that those opposite will now adopt. The least responsible course of action would be to abandon net zero. The Treasury said:

Not pursuing net zero by 2050 risks lower economic growth, reduced investment, missed export and employment opportunities, and higher electricity prices.

They said:

The economic costs to Australia of not pursuing net zero would be significant and consequential …

They said:

Australia is likely to face a higher cost of capital in international … markets if it does not pursue net zero.

This is the economic insanity that those opposite look likely to adopt. What they are proposing is absolutely insane in economic terms, and that's what the Treasury modelling document has made very clear.

The shadow Treasurer used to support net zero. In fact it was only last year he told this House 'there is bipartisanship when it comes to achieving the goal of net zero by 2050'. But what has changed and the reason he's now undermining his leader—as we read about in today's media—is that the economic vandalism, the right-wing extremism and the opportunism now infects every member of those opposite. To be fair to the opposition leader, they have all gone mad. They have all gone, as my predecessor would have said, troppo. And the Australian people will pay the price for their extremism. (Time expired)

See this speech in context