Ross Cadell (NSW, National Party, Shadow Minister for Water) Share this | Hansard source

Today, we heard a question about the renewables rollout. We've just heard a Labor senator highlight, again, the hypocrisy that runs through this place. We heard this great story about Tasmania and hydro and how we can do this. But, when it comes here, do we get money to build water infrastructure so that we can roll out hydro for the rest of us? No, we can't dam rivers. We can't do it. We can't do what you've got across the rest of Australia—through you, Mr Deputy President.

So here is the example they would like us to follow—but we won't let you do it. Here's another example of no-cost emission power called nuclear—but we won't let you do it. It's, 'Do it our way or no way at all.' That's what we get all the time. In fact the Prime Minister, down in Ballarat, comes out and says, 'We know we haven't done it right and we haven't consulted right, but we'll look better.' But, up to 10 times in this very chamber, they voted against an inquiry to look at how they do the rollout. So not only do they not want to do it right but they don't want to look at how they didn't do it right. This is the hypocrisy of this policy. It's when people talk about putting eight wind turbines off northern suburbs beaches. They said: 'We can't do that. It's too beautiful. But come to Port Stephens and let's put up 400.' The good news is that industry knows when they're on a loser, and they were on a loser with this, so industry stopped this plan.

Farmers showed up and chased, in a tractor, the Prime Minister's motorcade—I don't condone violence; I do condone peaceful protests—and that says how frustrating it is. A farmer in Victoria showed up with a noose around her neck to show the stress that is being put onto her. The government doesn't care, because they know this is about the consequences. They don't care in the city, because they don't see the consequences in regional Australia. They don't see that you can't get insurance because you've got wind turbines or solar panels next to you. They don't see the loss of amenity that happens out there. They don't see when a plastic bag is pinned on your fence—about a compulsory acquisition, so a transmission line can go through your property. They don't see the consequence, and they've voted 10 times in here to avoid seeing the consequences.

When Senator Dolega gets up and says, 'This is in Tasmania; let's talk about renewables,' sure, Tassie—great stuff—I love your dams and love your hydro. You are the Norway of Australia. But let us do it in the rest of Australia where there's plenty of water infrastructure. We're about to have an inquiry and look into the Murray-Darling thing. We're about to look at algal blooms down there. Was the fresh water running through that, with the nutrients, a contributor down in the algal bloom? Here's an idea: let's spend some of your money, build some water infrastructure, put a couple of gennies on it and make power for the rest of the country through the water coming down that system. That is what we can do.

But instead it's, 'Let's build transmission lines.' The VNI West transmission line—no generation—was quoted at $3.6 billion. When we go to the integrated system plan, this is what they believe: 'We won't give you a total system cost; we'll give you the integrated system plan cost.' In that is the transmission line, VNI West, for $3.6 billion. Then they say: 'Whoops—we've just had an update. It's increased a bit. It's now a minimum of $7.6 billion.' That's more than double what it was at last estimates. But there's good news, folks: it doesn't stop there. It's not just free steak knives; we'll throw in up to $11.2 billion, which is the expected cost for transmission lines. That's almost three times the original cost. Those are the numbers we're dealing with. This is the impossibly bad rollout we're dealing with.

Imagine the generation with a bit of water infrastructure and a couple of generators—a little Tassie on the Murray, a little Tassie in Victoria and a little Tassie in New South Wales. But we can't do that, because this government says no. We hear the real stories of farmers who are losing their farms, getting those plastic bags pinned on their fences and contemplating their own lives after their farms have been in their family for generations. It doesn't matter here, because it's not a consequence of where your voters are.

We can come here, and you can howl us down, 'You don't believe in climate change.' For the record, I believe in climate change. There was a chance here to vote, to have an inquiry and to do this better, and we got told no. If you fly into any city, there are acres of roofs without solar panels on them. There are blocks where you can have big grid-scale community batteries to keep the power where it's needed. This can be done better. Renewables need to be a part of what we're doing, but our people can't suffer everything for it. I get phone calls from guys who had their land compulsorily acquired and then lost their status as a primary producer for off-farm income, and it's not good enough. Don't be hypocrites; do it better.

Question agreed to.