Sally Sitou (Reid, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. How is the Albanese Labor government delivering on the plan backed by experts to provide cleaner, cheaper and more-reliable energy? Why is listening to trusted expert advice important? How does this approach compare with others?

Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank my honourable friend for her question. The Albanese government is delivering on a plan for cheaper, more-reliable energy for Australians, including 113,267 home batteries that have been installed since 1 July—2.3 gigawatt hours. Interestingly, nine of the top 10 electorates for cheaper home batteries are below the median weekly wage. So this is support going to those Australians who need it in order to reduce their energy bills. We're also delivering, through Solar Sharer, our plan to see more Australians being able to access free solar energy in the middle of the day, even if they don't have solar panels and a battery. All this is also leading to October being the first month in Australian history that we got 50 per cent of our power from renewable energy, in the NEM.

David Littleproud (Maranoa, National Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

For how long?

Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On average—not for a few minutes but on average. That's how the monthly figures work: on average.

This is a plan designed by Australian experts and backed by Australian experts—the CSIRO, AEMO, the Australian Energy Market Commission and the Australian Energy Regulator—all of whom have told the government repeatedly that renewables are the cheapest form of energy and that the biggest threat to reliability in the system is coal-fired power.

There is an alternative approach. On Saturday we saw the National Party announce that they are scrapping net zero. It'll be just a little while before the Liberal Party follows. The Leader of the National Party had justification. He called on expert reports. He said Net Zero Australia has said it will be somewhere between $7 trillion and $9 trillion, and Rainforest Reserves have already made it clear that going to an all-renewables approach would be $1.382 trillion. So he's quoting Net Zero Australia and Rainforest Reserves.

Let's have a look at the Leader of the National Party's experts. Net Zero Australia issued a statement today. It says:

Different individuals and groups have been misrepresenting key cost estimates from the NZAu Australia Project as 'the cost of Australia reaching net zero'. These misrepresented costs have typically ranged from $1.5 trillion to $9 trillion.

Does that sound familiar? I wonder who they were talking about misrepresenting them! Then we've got Rainforest Reserves. They've been quoting a lot of people. Rainforest Reserves quoted the Journal of Cleaner Production, who support their cases. The publishers of that journal were asked about the references, and they said:

These references appear to be hallucinated and do not exist—we have not found any articles with those titles published in Elsevier journals.

'Hallucinations' is a common theme. We've got the National Party and the Liberal Party following each other to net zero. It'll only be a few minutes before it's announced that the Liberal Party's followed them. The party of Menzies has become the party of Sky News frenzies.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We had the member for Cook interject nine times there and the Leader of the Nationals interject 11 times, so we're going to give it a break, because you've had a good go.