Senate debates

Tuesday, 22 June 2021

Bills

Fuel Security Bill 2021, Fuel Security (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2021; In Committee

7:06 pm

Photo of Rex PatrickRex Patrick (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I move my amendment No. 1 on sheet 1307:

(1) Page 69 (after line 8), after clause 80, insert:

80A National energy security strategy and plan

(1) The Minister must table in each House of the Parliament, on or before 30 June 2023, a national energy security strategy and plan.

(2) The national energy security strategy and plan must:

(a) outline how Australia's energy systems (including fuels) will be made more secure and resilient beyond 2027; and

(b) include all of the following matters:

  (i) the future of Australian refineries beyond 2027;

  (ii) how Australia will transition from fossil fuels to emerging energy sources;

  (iii) the retirement of fossil fuels;

  (iv) the development of alternative energy sources;

  (v) investment in alternative energy sources;

  (vi) any other investment required to implement the national energy security strategy and plan; and

(c) include an explanation of how such matters will be implemented.

(3) The Minister must publish, on the Department's website, the national energy security strategy and plan.

This is a very simple amendment but a very important one. What it does is require the minister, whoever is in government, to table in each house of parliament on or before 30 June 2023 a national energy security strategy and plan.

I don't want to cast this in any political light and I don't want to pre-empt any particular solution, but there are some minimum requirements of the plan. It ought to tell us what's going to happen in the future, beyond 2027, noting that is the date in the legislation when refineries may choose to not continue operating. So the question is: If that occurs, what are you going to do? Are you going to put in place another program to encourage them to be here? Senator Hanson has suggested we look at building our own refineries or at least owning our own refineries. This is not prescriptive about the solution. It just says that the government ought to be able to lay out what the plan is.

It would make sense, for example, if we are in a situation where we don't have a lot of fuel and there is vulnerability in supply chains, to examine how we shift away from those fuels to other fuels or other forms of energy, such as electricity—for example, electric vehicles. How do we switch to new fuels like hydrogen or ammonia? The plan calls on the government to lay out, if we're going to transition away from fossil fuels, how that will be done in a sensible fashion. It would look at things like how we shift from road to rail if that is a way of reducing dependency on fuel. How do we shift to, perhaps, coastal shipping if, indeed, that reduces our dependency on fuel?

So this amendment requires the government to lay out a plan. I think most Australians would say, 'That's a pretty sensible thing, having an energy security strategy and plan.' The Australian public would expect nothing less of the government of the day than that it be able to say, 'This is how we're going to solve our energy security problems,' and offer up perhaps some cost-benefit analysis associated with options that are put on the table. Again, this is not prescriptive about what the solutions are; it just requires the government to lay out solutions. I ask the Senate to support this very sensible amendment.

Comments

No comments