Rick Wilson (O'Connor, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Trade) | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—On behalf of the member for Gippsland, I move:

That this House:

(1) acknowledges that:

(a) natural gas is a key pillar of the Australian economy which employs 80,000 people in the industry supply chain, largely in regional areas;

(b) natural gas is connected to more than five million Australian homes and provided 42 per cent of the energy consumed by the Australian manufacturing sector in 2022;

(c) natural gas is essential to Australia achieving its net zero target by 2050;

(d) Australia has a critical role in providing a reliable source of natural gas to trusted trading partners which rely on our supplies for energy security; and

(e) regional Australia has benefitted enormously from long-term investment in the natural gas sector;

(2) notes that:

(a) new natural gas supply is needed to meet energy demand and reduce emissions in Australia and overseas;

(b) natural gas shortfalls will severely impact energy security and add to cost of living pressures; and

(c) the natural gas sector provided $17.1 billion in taxes, royalties and charges in 2023-24 allowing governments to invest in critical services and public infrastructure; and

(3) urges the Government to take urgent action to provide policy certainty which allows the industry to bring on the new gas supply needed to address forecast shortfalls, ensure Australia's energy security, and rebuild investor confidence.

My very good friend the member for Gippsland is unwell today, so I send my best wishes, and I'm sure all of the people in the chamber would wish Darren all the best to overcome his ailments as quickly as possible and get back and join the fray.

This motion relates to the importance of gas, not only to our economy but, certainly, in terms of creating the energy that we need to maintain our society. As Western Australians, I and my very dear friend the excellent member for Durack, whose electorate hosts most of the major gas projects in this country, understand the importance of gas. Western Australians do tend to take gas somewhat for granted because we have plentiful gas. Under governments over the years—whether it be the Court government, back in the 1980s, when the gas fields were first being developed and the gas pipeline from Karratha or Dampier down to Bunbury was put in place—we've had plentiful gas, and it's generally been reasonably priced.

That's not the case on the east coast. Sadly, we've seen neglect or outright opposition to new gas projects coming online, and, of course, we're now seeing the result of those policies by governments of all stripes on the east coast, which are now starting to see gas running out, becoming short in supply and getting very expensive.

I wouldn't normally go to the Sydney Morning Herald to find out information on how important gas is, but, on the weekend, Mike Foley and Nick Toscano published an article in the Sydney Morning Herald where they said:

The east coast of Australia will need 13 gigawatts of new gas fired electricity generation—the equivalent of building 26 new gas plants—within the next 25 years …

This is how important gas is, and the reality is starting to bite home. This is not the journalists' opinion; this is the Australian Energy Market Operator's latest report that indicates that that level of gas is going to be required.

Of course, the Grattan Institute is also not a place I would normally go to find support for the gas sector. However, climate policy expert Tony Wood said that the government's policy to encourage more renewables, known as the Capacity Investment Scheme, risks leaving the grid in a mess because gas was excluded. These are policies which are being implemented at the moment and are going to have long-term implications for our economy and, as I say, our society, which relies on gas very heavily.

Just to touch on some of the numbers around gas, there's been $300 billion invested in gas projects, mostly in WA and Queensland. I wouldn't have thought there has been a lot in Victoria recently; they're relying on gas from other states to keep their lights on—not a lot of investment. Last year, the gas industry paid $17.1 billion in taxes, royalties and charges to support the sort of services that the people of Australia quite rightly expect—the hospitals, the NDIS and those sorts of services. It employs 80,000 people in very well paid jobs. We've heard in the previous debate about wages. I'll tell you what—if you're working in the gas sector in Western Australia, you're earning a pretty good wage.

It provides 42 per cent of energy used by the manufacturing sector in Australia. That's what we've got left of it. Unfortunately, sadly, we're seeing more and more manufacturing—particularly heavy manufacturing, which relies on affordable and reliable baseload power—closing up. Sadly, in my part of the world, we're seeing the nickel industry in serious trouble. Potentially, the nickel smelter in Kalgoorlie will be closed by BHP in the next month or two, at the cost of up to 3½ thousand jobs. As I said, this is the outcome of the policies that the current government and certainly some state governments have pursued for some time.

Finally, five million homes are connected to gas in this country. People will be getting home tonight and turning the gas heater on to keep the house warm if they can afford to. In Victoria, of course, you're not allowed to use gas anymore. We have to use electricity, but we don't quite know where that electricity's going to come from, particularly when people get home at six o'clock in the evening and the sun's not shining and the wind's not blowing.

Andrew Wilkie (Clark, Independent) | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Melissa Price (Durack, Liberal Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Sam Rae (Hawke, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

Building towards a net zero Australia is not just about cleaner energy; it's also about ensuring that Australians have access to affordable energy. That's why the Albanese Labor government's Future Made in Australia agenda is about supporting economic growth while also helping global efforts to reduce the effects of climate change, creating new jobs and industries while lowering household energy bills and our emissions.

Despite what those opposite would have you think, moving towards a renewable energy future is not just economically viable; it's economically essential. We know that Australia is rich with natural resources, including those needed for renewable energy generation, such as sunlight and wind. Failing to capture the value of these renewable resources simply doesn't make economic sense. Of course, as we transition towards a renewable net zero economy, we must also recognise the critical role that gas will play as a reliable and cost-effective bridge. With our Future Gas Strategy, the Albanese Labor government is committed to using gas to provide energy security, ensuring a smooth transition to a more renewable grid. In fact, the Albanese Labor government has taken significant action to shore up gas supply and manage price impacts. For example, we introduced a mandatory code of conduct which has secured more than 600 petajoules of domestic gas for east coast users until 2033.

Despite the member for Gippsland acknowledging in his motion that ensuring supply is critical for maintaining affordability, this is a measure that the coalition has voted against. It is the perfect example of the difference between the Albanese Labor government and those opposite when it comes to energy policy. While we are taking a reasoned approach informed by data and evidence, those opposite are driven by political convenience. While we are seeking to deliver cleaner and more affordable energy for Australians, those opposite are looking to deliver more handouts to gas companies. While we see gas as a necessary part of the transition, helping to firm renewables and drive costs down, those opposite see it as a chance to lock in fossil fuel for decades to come. Only the Albanese Labor government can drive a reasonable renewable energy transition across the economy backed up by firmed hydro, batteries and gas-fired power generation. Our plan will put downward pressure on energy bills and ensure the long-term stabilisation of energy prices for households and businesses throughout the transition.

While the Albanese Labor government have a strong plan for Australia's energy future, we also know that many households and small businesses are already feeling the pinch and need more immediate support as well. That's why, from today, every single Australian household will start to receive a $300 energy rebate, while eligible small businesses will receive a $325 rebate, all thanks to the Albanese Labor government's Energy Bill Relief Fund. This is the second round of energy bill relief that this Labor government has delivered, despite opposition from the Liberals opposite, who voted against it.

It would appear that a decade of inaction while in government wasn't enough for the Liberals. Now, even from the opposition benches, they continue to oppose the Albanese Labor government's efforts to clean up their mess. Perhaps they're embarrassed by this failed decade, or perhaps they simply aren't capable of understanding responsible energy policy. In any case, the Albanese Labor government won't let those opposite stand in our way as we drive towards an energy grid powered by cheaper renewable energy, to benefit all Australians. As we continue to work towards net zero emissions, our Future Gas Strategy will support our commitment, ensuring that energy remains reliable and, importantly, affordable for all Australians throughout this transition.

Melissa Price (Durack, Liberal Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I gladly rise today to support this motion proposed by the member for Gippsland. As the federal member representing the Durack community, I am very proud to represent much of Western Australia's resources sector and natural gas production territory. I frequently meet with the sector and understand how critical gas is to Australia's economy today and into the future.

The natural gas supply chain employs 80,000 people across Australia, primarily in regional areas. In 2022, natural gas was connected to more than five million Australian homes and provided 42 per cent of the energy consumed by the Australian manufacturing sector. The sector also provided $17.1 billion in taxes, royalties and charges in 2023-24, allowing governments, state and federal, to invest in critical services and public infrastructure.

Unfortunately, under this government, we have seen the price of gas increase by 22.2 per cent, and the warnings of upcoming shortages are real. Shortages in a country that is as gas rich as ours—it's quite simply a joke. It's clear to everyone on this side of the House that we need more supply of gas, especially as we move away from coal supplies.

But it's not just Australian families who rely upon our natural gas. I'd like to remind the House that Australian natural gas is key to the energy markets of many of our major trading partners. Last year, Australian gas met 40 per cent of Japan's gas demand. Our gas is helping reduce their emissions as they shift away from coal and use our gas to manufacture green technologies. Countries like Japan have placed their trust in us to guarantee the future of our gas sector. I would like opponents of new LNG projects, like the Barossa LNG project or the Scarborough LNG project, to explain to me how such countries will meet their energy needs without our gas. It's quite ridiculous to think that such countries could take a renewables-only approach; instead, they would have to look to other sources. Goodness knows that reliance upon Russian energy is not the answer.

A coalition government will get Australia's gas sector back on track by slashing approval timeframes in half, without compromising on standards; we'll defund the Environmental Defenders Office; and we will commit to an annual release of offshore acreage for gas exploration and development. By supporting our gas sector, we will ensure that households and businesses can access affordable, reliable energy, and we'll stop Australian manufacturing jobs leaving the country due to gas shortages.

As a child of the Goldfields, I'm an advocate for the entire resources sector, and I was pleased to read in the Australian today that uranium exports are forecast to top $1 billion for the first time in 2023-24 and set to reach $1.7 billion in 2025-26. As the previous environment minister, I approved the last uranium mine in Western Australia. It was a good idea then and it is still a good idea today. Unfortunately, the WA Labor government introduced a ban on further mines, but I'm very pleased that the leader of the WA Liberal Party, Libby Mettam, has confirmed that, if elected, she will reverse the ban. I say, 'Hear, hear!' to that.

Given that our uranium is clearly good enough for the rest of the world, why shouldn't we move towards zero-emissions nuclear energy, using good Western Australian uranium? Currently, of the 20 largest economies, we are the only nation without nuclear power or plans to move towards it. I believe we need an 'all of the above' approach to energy. Renewables, gas and nuclear would create a well-balanced, affordable and reliable system.

I'll conclude by acknowledging that we have heard some encouraging words from the Minister for Resources regarding the future of gas; however, it must be said that the Future Gas Strategy, and the announcement that gas will remain an important source of energy through to 2050 and beyond, was not unanimously welcomed by those opposite. I have to say I have absolutely no confidence that Labor will keep its promises to the gas sector. What will happen to this commitment if they are thrown into minority government? This is what the Australian people need to think about. Our energy security is not something that we should play with.

Andrew Wilkie (Clark, Independent) | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I give the call to the member for Bruce, I will give an anticipatory warning to the members for Bruce, Moreton and Riverina to restrain yourselves during the next five minutes.

Julian Hill (Bruce, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm very fond of those ones! I'm very fond of them. I even know who they are, unlike some of the ones who wander in here!

This is a strange little motion. It's largely statements of obvious fact:

(a) natural gas is a key pillar of the Australian economy which employs … people …

(b) natural gas is connected to more than five million Australian homes—

true—

(c) natural gas is essential to Australia achieving its net zero target by 2050—

tick—

(d) Australia has a critical role in providing a reliable source of natural gas to trusted trading partners—

tick—

(e) regional Australia has benefitted enormously—

And so on. That's lovely. That's good, isn't it? Then there's this wacky plot twist when you get to part (3), which drifts into comedic irony. I couldn't call them hypocritical. I could note gross hypocrisy. That's okay in the Fed Chamber. We've done this a lot before. It's okay. It's a comment on the substance of the matter. But, anyway, we won't go there. We'll stay with 'comedic irony'. The motion:

(3) urges the Government to take urgent action to provide policy certainty which allows the industry to bring on the new gas supply needed to address forecast shortfalls, ensure Australia's energy security, and rebuild investor confidence.

Policy certainty, ensuring Australia's energy security and rebuilding investor confidence? Let's have a little chat about those things. First is policy certainty. Let's be clear. Every sensible economist, every energy analyst, every investor and every energy company says—and everyone except those opposite knows—that the No. 1 reason for rising energy prices in this country over the last decade has been a complete lack of policy certainty. The latest brain fart of an energy policy from these champions of the private sector is to borrow untold hundreds of billions of dollars of taxpayer money, reinventing socialism in their nuclear power fantasy. The No. 1 reason that we haven't had private sector investment in new supply is that, for nine miserable years, they couldn't tell the investors what the rules were. Here's a free tip for those giants of capitalism opposite. The private sector need to know the rules to make an investment. Instead, in this decade of decay, division, dysfunction and despair, they had 22 different energy policies. They've just released their 23rd, making 23 in a decade—genius! There was no investment because of the lack of rules.

If we're going to talk about certainty, under their watch 24 of Australia's coal-fired power stations announced they were going to close, and they did nothing. AEMO and the ACCC consistently warned about the risk of gas supply shortfalls. Ironically, the coalition put out press releases welcoming the rise in investment here and there in renewable energy, all of which flowed because of the targets put in place by the former Rudd and Gillard Labor government. That is what led to renewable energy. Pretty much the only new energy they got investment in was because of the Rudd and Gillard government. Energy for them was just a culture war.

The member for Gippsland—and I do wish him well in his recovery—is a real authority on gas. He was a cabinet minister in that train wreck of the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison government. Remember the gas-fired recovery, Deputy Speaker? It was a failed policy that directed millions of dollars of taxpayer funds to their gas industry mates, with literally nothing to show for it. They had 22 energy policies—now 23. They dropped the resources minister out of the cabinet. If you were going to have an emoji for that, would it be 'face palm' or 'head explode'? Actually, what I just said isn't quite true, is it? They had a secret resources minister in the cabinet, the former Prime Minister, Scott Morrison. He had a secret portfolio that he told no-one about.

An honourable member: Busy boy!

He was. They changed the rules before they left government, to cover up the price rises. It was an absolute disgrace.

But I'll tell you what you don't do if you want policy certainty and energy security in Australia and to rebuild investor confidence. You don't whack investor confidence with a ridiculous, risky nuclear fantasy—the most expensive form of new power. Their plan is to push up our prices in about 20 years when they get around to building something. It's genius, isn't it? It's too expensive and it's too slow. And you know what? It's not even a policy. It's a pamphlet. It's four pages with a picture of a Rolls-Royce nuclear power plant they cut and pasted from the internet. Imagine if Labor had released a policy with no costings and a picture from the internet. Unbelievable.

The most damaging impact, though, ironically—we'll end where we started—is the impact on investor confidence because of this mob's behaviour.

Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

It's wonderful to see the member for Bruce and those opposite are committed to gas. It is good to see. As a candidate, the rhetoric before the election wasn't quite as strong, but they're there now. They've seen the value in gas. It is wonderful to see. I look forward to them continuing to support the industry moving forward, although I do note that, when the resources minister made her announcement, a few of those opposite were very nervous about that decision and there were a few that did decide to speak out. I will watch with interest when more bills come up on gas, particularly if they look to restrict gas, given we've seen the newfound freedom that the caucus has to speak out and potentially cross the floor if they don't agree with something. So it's good to see those opposite passionately defending gas. Hopefully, their colleagues who criticised the decision at the time will rethink what they do.

We cannot get to net zero by 2050 without a combination of everything being on the table. As a coalition, we've talked about a renewables-gas-coal transition to renewables-gas-nuclear to make sure we have that base-load power. We hear those opposite talk about investor certainty. Just 50 metres from here, the Tech Council of Australia are having their tech showcase. I was talking to one of the data centre companies there—I've spoken to many data centre companies across the country in the last two years in this role—about the need for greater energy supply because data centres take a lot of energy. AI, as a new technology, requires significant amounts of energy. That's before we include population growth coming in to the country and manufacturing continuing to grow—hopefully; it's struggling under this government but will need to continue to grow.

Those opposite should understand that investors know there will be greater demand for energy. We will need every lever. We will need renewables absolutely. We will need gas absolutely. We will continue to need to look at nuclear and be prepared to have a mature conversation, because as many scientists, including Alan Finkel, the former Chief Scientist, have said, nuclear power is the only zero emissions, base-load, reliable power that exists at scale in this country. Hydroelectricity is not possible at scale in this country because of our geography and topography. The reason gas is also so important in that mix is that it provides peaking power that can come on. For many industries, including an industry I was lucky to work in—the food manufacturing industry—prior to politics, there is no energy source other than gas that can be used to cook the food, to cook the chips, to cook many of the products. Industry needs gas. So it is wonderful to see those opposite are now on board.

But there are a couple of concerns, particularly about the price of gas. In Victoria we have a state Labor government that are opposed to gas, and they argue openly with federal Labor. Hopefully, federal Labor can start to get control of state Labor. These are the consequences of not having enough gas in the industry. I want to quote from a local resident of mine, Cecil, who emailed me. He said: 'Just received our gas bill. Double the price. Now $582. How does this PM in Canberra think pensioners are going to stop from freezing this winter? The last thing I want to hear from him is "I know things are tough at the moment."'

So many in my community rely on gas for energy, but they also rely on it in an emergency and to build redundancy into the system. I'm concerned about this push for electrification of all houses and of all networks. In June 2021, my community was devastated by the June storms, which left my family and me without power for three weeks. But that was nothing; many in my community were without power for three months. But I know for a fact because I lived it. We could stay in our home because we had gas. We had a gas cooker and gas hot water and we were able to get a small generator to give us a little bit of power at night for the lights.

That's why we continue to need gas in the system. We're going to electrify houses and, with EVs, there will be more demand. There will be so much pressure on the electricity system moving forward that all options need to be on the table. The government is not prepared to have a mature, visionary conversation and look 10, 20 or 30 years into the future.

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Gippsland for his motion on the importance of natural gas. Like the member for Riverina, I wish the member for Gippsland all the best. I will miss him tomorrow morning when the mighty Queensland parliamentary team takes on the New South Wales team—

No, the member for Gippsland won't be turning out for Queensland, but I note that the member for Casey, as a good Victorian, will be turning out for Queensland. I look forward to him being an honorary Queenslander tomorrow!

This motion gives me an opportunity to talk about Labor's forward-thinking Future Gas Strategy and our commitment to net zero by 2050. I mention this international commitment as the Leader of the Opposition has no intention of keeping this promise. Never mind that the effects of climate change have caused a global crisis. Never mind that we need to achieve net zero to keep our planet livable. Unlike those opposite, the Albanese Labor government is serious about climate change. We are working towards our aim to reduce our carbon emissions by 43 per cent, or better, by 2030. We must achieve net zero emissions by 2050 or before—many scientists say before. We're also working hard towards a target of 82 per cent renewable energy in our grid by 2030. The more renewables, the cheaper for Moreton households their electricity bills will be. We know that. When you drive around my community, you see solar panels on nearly every other house.

While Labor takes positive action, the Leader of the Opposition seems to be hanging everything on the idea of being able to provide a nuclear power station in two decades time or more. After 22 or 23 failed energy policies, it's sad that this is the best the coalition can come up with—it's sort of the poor man's culture wars, I guess. It would be laughable if it weren't so delusional and so serious. The only renewable energy that the member for Dickson seems to believe in is ignorance. There are no details about how much nuclear will cost hardworking Australians. The coalition need to come clean about how much their nuclear policy will end up costing and how they intend to get around state legislation banning nuclear power. Obviously, they can nationalise the sites—the Constitution does provide for that, if just terms are paid—and then they can co-opt Homer Simpson into the Commonwealth Public Service to run the reactors out in the bush or wherever they will be. What could possibly go wrong?

Instead of building castles in the air that look like cooling towers, which is the opposition plan, Labor is focused on the cheapest form of energy: renewables, firmed-up renewables and even more renewables. Under Labor, we've had a 25 per cent increase in renewables in the grid, record investment in batteries and storage, and over 330,000 rooftop solar installations last year alone. We've green-lit more than 50 renewable projects since the last election and we're already halfway to meeting our 2030 emissions reduction target in the national grid.

Where does gas fit into this, as per the member's motion? Gas is the bridge to net zero. Why? Because you can instantly turn gas off and on, unlike coal and unlike nuclear. Labor's Future Gas Strategy acknowledges that, although the role of gas must change, gas must be available and affordable. It has a key role to play in our transition to net zero. It provides energy security for homes, for industry and for jobs right now, as our grid slowly changes. The strategy is evidence based and does not invest taxpayer money in gas operations. It states our commitment to net zero by 2050 and affirms that gas must remain affordable for Australians during this transition period. The strategy acknowledges that new sources of gas supply will be needed to support demand throughout the transition and that gas and electricity markets must adapt and remain fit for purpose. New gas fields supplying LNG must be carbon neutral from the start of operations. They've been given a zero baseline allocation for the reservoir CO2 in their new fields. As coal-fired power stations across the country shut down—this is very old capital, obviously—a mix of renewables, storage and gas will be used to ensure ongoing supply. We envisage that gas-powered electricity generation will be used to meet, particularly, peak demand events—a very cold night; or State of Origin half-time, when everyone in Queensland and New South Wales goes out at the one time to turn their kettles on. While we're working towards this transition, and as coal-fired power plants go offline, it's crucial that we do not suffer from power blackouts or astronomical energy bills or have to close down manufacturing plants that rely on gas. That would not be a realistic approach to our country's energy demands.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) | Link to this | Hansard source

I very much take pleasure in speaking on this motion brought to the parliament by the member for Gippsland, who is unwell, as we've heard. He will be back tomorrow; don't worry. But it is with great pleasure that I follow the members for O'Connor, Durack and Casey on the coalition side, arguing about the merits of gas. There were some parts of the member for Moreton's contribution that I very much agreed with, but he ought to know that, under those nine years of the coalition government, one in four homes had rooftop solar. That was the highest take-up in the world of rooftop solar. Electricity bills were actually down. We made gas affordable. We made power achievable. Indeed, the price of gas is up 22.2 per cent under Labor. That is simply not good enough from a government which purports to put in place a made-in-Australia manufacturing policy. Industry requires gas and is going to need gas in large volumes to make sure that we do have 'a future made in Australia'. Households are going to require more and more gas because, when the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow and the batteries do not have sufficient capacity to store the power, then something has got to give, and we can't have our grid collapsing and failing at a time of importance.

Legislation passed in this place just last December meant that unconventional gas production, including from the Northern Territory's Beetaloo basin, a vital source of gas, was going to require new approvals from the Commonwealth after the government brought forward its plans to expand the so-called water trigger. Of course, once this came up, the Greens couldn't wait to get out and take credit for it. But the expanded trigger was very much opposed by the mining industry, which was very nervous and very worried about what the government was proposing and bringing forward. Samantha McCulloch from industry group Australian Energy Producers said that the updated water trigger legislation would create 'unnecessary duplication' and added that it would offer 'another barrier to unlocking gas supply'. She said:

Changes passed by the Senate last night pre-empted proper process and consultation under the ongoing reform of the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act.

We know that power bills have increased by $1,000 more than what the Albanese government promised. We know that 90 per cent of base-load electricity—predominantly coal-fired power stations—is coming to the end of life over the next decade. We know that gas is going to fill a large part of that shortfall, or should do. I invite the member for Moreton to pick up the phone to some of his Victorian Labor colleagues, because they want gas taken out of the network holus-bolus.

Australians are currently paying some of the highest electricity prices in the world, up to 56c per kilowatt hour. The government's target of 82 per cent renewables by 2030 requires 4.5 gigawatts of additional large-scale wind and solar every year. Last year, less than one-third of this was delivered. All politics is local. In my local area, at the Wagga Wagga City Council in May this year the Greens councillor Jenny McKinnon had a bit of a try-on. We know there are local government elections this September. She put a motion to phase out the use of gas in the city. The Wagga Wagga distribution network is a gas distribution pipeline located in southern New South Wales, of course. The pipeline is owned by Australian Gas Networks and approximately 690 kilometres in length. It's a big system. But, interestingly, Councillor McKinnon's motion lapsed due to a lack of a seconder, and that was the appropriate and right way for it to go.

We need more gas in the system. The Western Australians got it right when they put a gas reserve in place. We need to be sure that we have gas for exports and gas for domestic supply. If we're going to have a future made in Australia, then we need more gas, and the government needs to address this.

David Smith (Bean, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I also rise this evening to speak on the member for Gippsland's motion. We wish him a speedy return. This motion is weak on substance and rich in irony, as the member for Bruce suggested. The irony is, of course, that the member for Gippsland was in the ministry for much of the last decade and had input, or potentially a lack of input, into nearly a decade of 22 failed energy policies. Indeed, the member must wake up each and every morning with a big sigh of relief that it's the Albanese government in charge of stewarding the transition of our energy system and not those opposite.

Since coming to government, the Albanese government has taken immediate and strong action to shore up gas supply and manage price impacts by introducing the mandatory code of conduct, strengthening the Australian domestic gas supply mechanism and releasing the Future Gas Strategy. That's right—the motion calls for certainty on our natural gas policy, and to that I remind the chamber that we have strengthened certainty with the release of the Future Gas Strategy. Our Future Gas Strategy is taking a reasoned approach informed by data and evidence. We aren't spending millions of taxpayer dollars on fossil fuel projects. In fact, we aren't investing in gas projects or infrastructure at all. That's the job of the private sector.

This government understands that gas will play a changing role in Australia's energy transformation as we move to renewables. Coal is retiring, and we are well on our way to renewables, but in the meantime gas provides energy security because it makes intermittent sources like wind and solar stable and firm. That's why gas is described as a transition fuel. It's an enabler of the transition. We must ensure that the lights stay on, but for much of the last decade the opposition policy has had an approach of keeping the lights on while no-one has been at home. In the long term, gas will mostly be used in hard-to-abate sectors, such as cementmaking, brickmaking, glass manufacturing and minerals processing. Gas use will need to be decarbonised where possible and abated where not.

Our Future Gas Strategy is driven by net zero because this government is committed to net zero. Principle 1 of the Future Gas Strategy is this:

Australia is committed to supporting global emissions reductions to reduce the impacts of climate change and will reach net zero emissions by 2050.

Our reforms to the safeguard mechanism will drive down emissions across a range of emissions-intensive oil and gas operations covering the emissions of 130 resources sector facilities. New gas fields supplying LNG facilities have been given a zero-baseline allocation for the reservoir CO2 in their new fields. This is law. This means that gas from new offshore fields will be carbon neutral from the start. Since this government came to office, there's been a 25 per cent increase in renewables in the national energy market, and this has driven both total emissions and emissions intensity to all-time record lows.

The coalition's gas led recovery was not underpinned by any sound evidence or analysis. All the coalition did was hand out taxpayer money to the gas industry and threaten to use big sticks. We on this side know that the energy transition will be complex and that the scale of the challenge is immense. We are starting 10 years behind because of the total inaction of those opposite. At the moment, the Leader of the Opposition and the member for Gippsland are giving us an easy choice. Do we want renewables firmed by gas and batteries or do we want uncosted, untimely nuclear power? After 10 years of no policy, their current policy approach, policy approach No. 23, is based on climate denial and nuclear fantasy.

Gas plays a critical role in Australia's economy. It's also an important part of Australia's future, because it will enable us to compete successfully in the global race for jobs and opportunities in a net zero world. But the global shift to clean energy is Australia's biggest opportunity for growth and prosperity, and the member for Gippsland and his party should come on board and back it.

Rebekha Sharkie (Mayo, Centre Alliance) | Link to this | Hansard source

There being no further speakers, the debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.

Kate Thwaites (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) notes that on Monday, 1 July 2024, every Australian household will receive $300 in energy bill relief and small businesses will receive $325 off their energy bills; and

(2) acknowledges the Government's number one priority is to tackle the cost of living pressures facing Australians by ensuring they earn more and keep more of what they earn.

Today is 1 July, and, from today, Australians will start to see more energy bill relief coming their way: power bill rebates of $300 for every household and $325 for one million small businesses. All 65,000 homes in my community of Jagajaga, from Bundoora and Watsonia to Eltham and Research, from Macleod to Heidelberg West and Ivanhoe—every household—will receive a $300 power bill rebate, starting from today, and so will every household right across Australia. One million small businesses, Australia-wide, will receive a $325 power bill rebate too, delivering direct support for small businesses, including the 14,000 small businesses in Jagajaga. If you're a homeowner or a small business owner, you will see this energy bill relief applied directly to the bills you receive from your energy provider over the course of this financial year. You don't have to do anything. You will see this money being applied—being taken off your bill.

This builds on the work we did earlier, in our last budget, to give energy bill relief for certain households. With this measure, we are extending that relief to every Australian household. For Victorians, for people in Jagajaga, our government's energy bill relief builds on successive rounds of the Victorian government's Power Saving Bonus, another great program that helps people in my community save money and, at the same time, ensure that they are getting the best possible deal on their energy bills. This is work we are doing to directly support Australians, because we know that times are difficult at the moment. We know that costs are high, and we are directly supporting households with $300 off their energy bill.

We also know that those opposite didn't want this. In fact, when they had the opportunity, they voted against measures that would have kept power bills lower. So we know where their loyalties lie. They don't lie with providing cost-of-living relief. They don't lie with keeping power bills lower. They lie elsewhere, not with Australians who need the support right now.

This energy bill relief is just one part of a whole suite of our government's cost-of-living support rolling out from today: tax cuts for every Australian taxpayer; a freeze on the cost of PBS medicines for every Australian; a third consecutive pay rise for 2.6 million workers; more funding to build more homes in every part of the country; and—this one is a personal favourite of mine—an additional two weeks of paid parental leave to kick in. That builds on work our government has already done to make child care cheaper and to expand fee-free TAFE, and, of course, our biggest-ever investment in bulk-billing. We've increased Commonwealth rent assistance by a further 15 per cent. We've wiped almost $3 billion in student debt.

This is real cost-of-living relief. It is tangible. It is for every person in Jagajaga and it is for every person across this country, because, as I have said, our government understands that this is a difficult time for many Australians. We are doing the work we want to do and we need to do, to support Australians at this difficult time. We know that there is still more work to be done. We are working hard to deliver on our economic plan, helping Australians right now with the measures that I have just outlined, while also being very clear that we are working on bringing down inflation and planning for the future—particularly with our Future Made in Australia plan, to manufacture more here and make sure we get the benefits of the transition to clean energy in this country.

I am very pleased that from today, 1 July, people in my community will start to see the rollout of our government's latest measures to help with the cost of living. All 77,000 taxpayers in Jagajaga will receive a tax cut, with an average tax cut in our community of $1,782. Our plan delivers a bigger tax cut for lower- and middle-income earners while ensuring that everyone still receives a tax cut. Plus, we're increasing the Medicare levy for low-income thresholds. One million taxpayers will continue to be exempt from the Medicare levy or pay a reduced levy rate. As I've said, from today people will start to see that energy bill relief applied directly to their bills, with $300 off those bills, and $325 off for small businesses. This is real, direct, tangible support. This is supporting Australians with cost-of-living relief.

Rebekha Sharkie (Mayo, Centre Alliance) | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Matt Burnell (Spence, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Shadow Minister for International Development and the Pacific) | Link to this | Hansard source

In question time today I asked the Prime Minister a very serious question about Capital Brewing Co, a local success story. He took me up on the regionality of that. Given my boundary changes—many of us in New South Wales are experiencing electorate boundary changes, and I'm no different—my electorate will now wrap right around the Australian Capital Territory. Indeed, after these new changes, Riverina, if you look at it from the start of Federation, will now have bordered four different states or territories in its time. I think it would just about be the only electorate to do that. There was a very serious question from the Managing Director and Co-founder of Capital Brewing Co, Laurence Kain. Their energy costs have risen and are out of control. Their electricity bill has got up $4½ thousand a month, to $12,000 per month, over the past two years. The Prime Minister gave a very dismissive answer. Capital Brewing Co has made investments, as I understand, in Batlow Cider and that burgeoning industry, and that is good. Of course, Batlow is currently in Eden-Monaro but is soon to be back in the Riverina, as it was between 2010 and 2016.

But the trouble we've got with the energy mix is that Labor has an 'all eggs in the one basket' approach. It's renewables only, and it defies engineering and economics. We have to avoid and abandon this ideological approach at all costs. We need a network grid with balance, and that balance should include gas. We've got the Victorian state government trying to prevent and stop all gas in homes. If we've got a federal Labor Party determined to proceed with its Future Made in Australia manufacturing plan, then we have to have affordable, reliable, available gas. We have to open up opportunities in the Beetaloo Basin. We have to have more exploration and investment in Western Australia, Queensland and, for that matter, Victoria, because gas does provide many of the answers.

We should have a rational, national discussion about nuclear; we can't afford not to. Indeed, if we're going to get to net zero by 2050, as is our nation's desire, then we have to have nuclear in that balance. But let's have the discussion, with carefully considered costings and locations. Let's have a discussion about the viability of nuclear, not just, as the member for Moreton said in the last debate, these silly Homer Simpson references and that type of immaturity. Let's have a clear discussion with experts in the field, making sure everybody has their say. We appreciate that coal-fired power plants are exiting the system and that we do need to have renewables in the mix—we know that.

In this motion, the member for Jagajaga talks about how there is going to be a $325 reduction, but this is just a nonsense when you consider the costs of everything. It's $325 off just your power bills, for goodness sake. We've got rent up, food up, power up, education up and health costs up. Everything is just going up and up.

She talked about child care—it's fantastic, talking about the affordability of child care. I'm sure the member for Calare would agree with me: it's not just about affordability; it's about availability in regional areas. It is about availability, because many of our mums and dads who want to get into the workforce are just crying out for childcare centres. It's actually getting harder and tougher on Labor's watch.

The member for Jagajaga addressed bulk-billing too, but bulk-billing rates have slumped markedly from 88 to 77 per cent under Labor. When we talk about bulk-billing, we had the health minister Mark Butler say, 'If you can't get a doctor to bulk-bill, well, just find another one.' That ain't easy in regional Australia—trust me.

Louise Miller-Frost (Boothby, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

The No. 1 focus for this government is cost of living. We are focused on ensuring cost-of-living relief for all Australians, but we're also very focused on ensuring that this does not drive up inflation. Providing cost-of-living relief in ways that are meaningful but not inflationary is difficult but not impossible, and the Treasurer has ensured a raft of measures that provide relief for most, if not all, Australians, and in multiple ways for many of them. We understand that family budgets are tight and that the impact of cost-of-living pressures and inflation are being felt around kitchen tables across the country, and that's why we delivered substantial cost-of-living relief in the budget.

We've delivered a tax cut for every Australian taxpayer and bigger tax cuts for more workers. From 1 July, 13.6 million Australian taxpayers will get a tax cut, with the average worker getting a tax cut of more than $1,500 a year. Importantly, this includes those on lower incomes—unlike the stage 3 tax cuts designed by those opposite, which specifically ignored those on low incomes. Australian workers on the minimum wage or low incomes have got significant pay rises under this government. They are also getting a tax cut, because Labor wants Australian workers to earn more and keep more of what they earn.

By contrast, the Liberals and Nationals didn't want Australians on low incomes to get a pay rise, and they didn't want them to get a tax cut. This group of Australian workers that they don't care about includes many young Australian workers and an overrepresentation of women. Ninety-eight per cent of young workers are better off under Labor's tax cuts, and 90 per cent of women are better off under Labor's tax cuts, compared to the tax cuts of those opposite.

Some of the other cost-of-living measures coming into effect on 1 July include $300 in energy bill relief for every household and $325 for one million small businesses. We've increased Commonwealth rent assistance by a further 15 per cent, taking the total increase to 25 per cent, which makes it the first back-to-back increase in Commonwealth rent assistance in three decades. Treasury estimates that our energy bill relief and Commonwealth rent assistance changes will directly reduce inflation by half a percentage point in 2024-25 and will not add to the broader inflationary pressures, because Labor are good economic managers: producing back-to-back surpluses, paying down debt, turning inflation around from the 6.1 per cent we inherited from those opposite, and keeping unemployment at record lows. We've also seen 880,000 jobs created since we came to government—a new record for a government in their first term.

There's still a lot of work to do, but the record of those opposite—back-to-back deficits for nine years; almost a trillion dollars of debt, with not much to show for it; rising inflation; energy prices they had to change regulations to hide before the election—shows the contrast.

We heard the previous speaker say that they want to have a rational debate on nuclear. They have no costings, and no investor will touch it. It's such a good proposition! It's not, really.

Anyway, back to our cost-of-living measures: we've wiped almost $3 billion in student debt, helping more than three million, mostly younger, Australians, with the average worker saving around $1,200. We've also changed the way HECS is calculated so that it will never again go up faster than wages growth. We've provided up to $3 billion to make medicines cheaper, freezing the maximum cost of PBS prescriptions for everyone. That's on top of the 60-day prescriptions, where you get two months of medication for the price of one month. The Liberals already said no to cheaper medicines, no to energy bill relief, no to tax cuts and no to 60-day prescriptions. In fact, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition said they would roll back the tax cuts. When it comes to cost of living, the Liberals always say no. Their negativity is no substitute for economic credibility, and their record shows where they stand.

We are getting on with rolling out billions of dollars of cost-of-living relief that's carefully calibrated to take some of the edge off the pressures that people are under. We've done all this at the same time as we are expecting to deliver back-to-back surpluses for the first time in two decades, overseeing wages picking up in growth to the fastest in 15 years and an earlier-than-expected return to annual real wage growth.

Aaron Violi (Casey, Liberal Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

Once again I have to go to my regular fact-check and remind those opposite not to take the Treasurer's talking points for granted. Our net debt was actually $517 billion when those opposite came to power, and about 30 per cent of that net debt was actually accrued during the Rudd-Gillard-Rudd era. They continue to spin this mistruth, which really sums up those opposite. It's all about political spin. It's all about running a line. If you have to keep telling people the cost of living is your No. 1 priority, it's clear that it's not and it's clear that the Australian people know that. Less spin and more delivery would be good.

This motion is very brave. It's very brave for those opposite to talk about energy prices. It's very light on as well: two points. Normally we see from the government, when they put in their motions, that there are four or five points and lots of subpoints. This is very light on. What it's missing is some detail. It's missing the number 275. It's missing the promise that the Prime Minister made 97 times before the election that they were going to reduce energy prices by $275. He also made that promise 30 times after Ukraine was invaded by Russia, yet when he was elected, he then defended not meeting his word and breaking his promise on energy by referencing the invasion of Ukraine by Russia, again showing that this government is all about spin, not about delivering for the Australian people.

What's actually happening with the electricity prices? Why do those opposite need to subsidise electricity prices? It's because it's up 21.5 per cent since the Albanese Labor government came to power. That means that households are paying more, businesses are paying more, community groups and charities are paying more. But let's be very clear: it's not just their power bills that they are paying more for. Every time you go to the grocery store, you are paying more. When you buy something at the supermarket, you are paying more because, when energy goes up, it impacts every level of the supply chain.

I was fortunate enough to spend over a decade working in fast-moving consumer goods, supplying products to Woolworths and Coles supermarkets. When energy goes up, as I said, it hits everything. It's not just the finished product. Keeping it cold at Woolworths and Coles costs more. Their energy costs more. Delivering it to the store costs more. For the supplier, their energy costs go up. Their cost of manufacturing goes up. Their raw materials go up because the farmer or the supplier that gives them the raw materials has to increase their prices. That is why it's so important that you get energy prices down, because every point along the supply chain is impacted. That's why, when you go to the store, you're seeing prices go up 10, 20 or 30 per cent. It's why you need to have a plan to address cost of living, which those opposite don't have.

But we also hear those opposite talk about costing. They're not prepared to have a mature conversation about nuclear power and the importance of the only zero emissions, baseload, scalable technology that we have in Australia. They talk about the opposition's costings, but they won't talk about their lack of costings. The Capacity Investment Scheme that the government announced last year puts a floor under electricity prices for renewables companies. It does, in fairness to them, put a ceiling on the profits they can make, but that floor is going to cost the Australian taxpayer money. Australian taxpayers are subsidising renewable energies, which is okay, but don't lecture us about no costings when you have not provided the cost for the Capacity Investment Scheme. That is going to cost billions of dollars of taxpayer money, but they're not prepared to release the costings on that. The transition has not been costed by those opposite.

So they talk about our nuclear plan. The opposition leader has said very clearly that we'll go through the locations and have a mature conversation. It would be nice if those opposite spent less time putting memes up of The Simpsons on social media and actually had an honest conversation with the Australian public, because everything impacts that supply chain, as I said, and demand is continuing to go up, whether it's immigration—more people in the country—AI or data centres. We're electrifying homes and we're moving to EVs. There is going to be so much demand on the electricity system. You need renewables, you need gas and you need nuclear to bring prices down and put more supply into the market. (Time expired)

Matt Burnell (Spence, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

We are now drawing towards the end of 1 July, a day that has seen millions of Australians waking up to earning more, keeping more of what they earn and, for millions more still, receiving the benefit of a number of measures that our government has put in place in order to provide families across Australia with targeted, measured cost-of-living relief.

From today, millions of Australians, 10 million households and one million small businesses will receive a $300 and a $325 rebate for their power bills, respectively. This was done as part of a $3½ billion package to provide energy bill relief as widely as possible and is one of a number of measures, as part of our recent budget, that are squarely aimed at easing cost-of-living pressures for millions of Australians—measures squarely designed to make life easier for families doing it tough whilst at the same time not shifting those pressures onto inflation.

Those opposite have had a crack at reducing power bills for Australians both in government and in opposition—something that, in both cases, is a mirage. We all remember the member for Hume's big attempt at keeping power prices down under the Morrison government. Quite simply, you just need to be aware that the prices are about to rise before an election, with the Australian Energy Regulator about to deliver its default market offer. This offer contains an inconvenient truth that might interfere with yet another one of your confected narratives about what a Liberal-National government means. So what do you do about it? You simply delay the release of the new and increased energy prices contained in the default market offer until after the election. Are they going up? Are they going down? Well, until they are released to the public, you might as well call it Schrodinger's power prices. You can only know what's happening with any certainty once you peek inside the box. In opposition, they make hiding the power prices from the public look like child's play.

Speaking of child's play, those opposite put out a thought bubble not just to be an answer in Australia reaching net zero by 2050 but also to reduce power prices and firm up base-load capacity. A year and a half after this thought bubble, they release the detail of this policy on a 4½-page pamphlet—real paper, real ink and real staples but not a real solution. They would have the Australian people believe another one of their furphies that somehow nuclear power is a panacea to Australia's future power generation, despite no credible evidence existing of this working, the numbers stacking up and the costings panning out. Not a single major player in Australia's energy industry, renewables or otherwise, had been asking for it.

If nuclear power made sense, you would have companies owning power-generating assets clamouring at the gates to repeal it, but, instead, the new Liberal Party way is to shun these companies and say that they don't know what they're talking about and to bring government back into the power generation game. On the one hand, if they hadn't, Australia would be paying more for their power through the cost recovery of building one of these plants in the next couple of decades once it is built—unless you believe that they can somehow believe the Leader of the Opposition that he would be able to get it done at a world-record pace. Maybe he knows a guy in the nuclear reactor building business that operates out of a small shack with 50 grand in the bank. I'm sure he'd award them a contract. It's what he did as home affairs minister. It's all he knows.

When the CSIRO and AEMO released their GenCost report saying that nuclear power is going to be more expensive, I'd be listening to them rather than shrugging that off. It's very easy to dispute modelling when you aren't releasing yours—if any modelling even exists to underpin the 4½ pages of policy. Meanwhile, the opposition wants to continue to place a mirage of nuclear power in front of Australia, disputing science and scientists because of vibes alone and turning this into some twisted form of 'Australia's next top modelling'.

The Albanese Labor government is continuing to invest in a future that includes firm renewables along with gas. We are investing in cost-of-living relief for all Australians in our budget, and, when it comes to this nuclear pipedream, we are investing in the intelligence of the Australian people to know exactly what the Liberal and National parties are actually doing every time they enter into the energy debate saying that they are for renewable energy.

Rebekha Sharkie (Mayo, Centre Alliance) | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned, and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.

Federation Chamber adjourned at 19:30