Marielle Smith (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Senator Sharma, I do believe we're meant to be taking note of coalition questions asked in question time. Senator O'Neill did ask a cracking question, and Senator Gallagher gave a cracking answer, so I guess I won't call a point of order on you this time. But I'm going to stick to the protocol and talk to the questions asked by the coalition of government senators relating to net zero and energy policy.

It's pretty extraordinary. In a decade of coalition government, they brought 21 or 22 energy policies to this place—it might have even got to 23—and didn't land a single one. Now they're back with another energy policy to step away from net zero, a position which would hurt workers, affect jobs and damage industry. It is absolutely clear to me, as it should be to anyone who was watching question time today, that if the coalition were to lead our country again they would be leading our country back to the Dark Ages.

I wear a stegosaurus dinosaur around my neck today, and that little stegosaurus is in pretty good company, because the dinosaurs still roam freely amongst the coalition—they still roam freely amongst the corridors of this place. The coalition is still debating whether or not climate change is real, and their anti-climate-action crusaders are doing our nation such a deep, deep disservice. Do you know what harms businesses? It's regulatory uncertainty. Do you know what harms business and industry? It's policy chaos. That's exactly what we saw after 10 years of a coalition government.

This is an opposition that simply doesn't get it. This is an opposition that doesn't listen and, presumably, does not read. This is an opposition that ignores the science. They want us to go back to the Dark Ages, and they have dinosaurs roaming amidst their ranks. This is a coalition who would seek to take Australians backwards, but Australians cannot afford to keep paying the price of the coalition's constant climate infighting. The coalition had 23 different energy policies when they were in government and not a single one of them landed.

The chaos, denial and delay that we saw under the coalition government, which continues today among coalition members, have left us with a much bigger challenge to face now than what we would have faced had they acted on the science earlier, had they believed in the science and had they cared enough to deliver an energy policy that would make a meaningful difference on climate change and on our transition and done what industry and business have been calling for, for years and years—the regulatory certainty which guides their investment decisions which enable them to act; policy certainty not policy chaos. One thing is very, very clear: if the opposition were to return to government we would see the disunity and division which defined them for years continue in climate policy and energy policy. It would take our country backwards, it would cost Australians more, and it would hurt business and industry.

The coalition talked about nuclear at the last election. It was another policy that was fundamentally and utterly rejected by the Australian people, because Australians get it. Australians believe the science and Australians know we have incredible natural advantages in renewable energy. Do you know how they know that? They opened their blinds and looked out the window and they saw the sun and the wind. They saw all of these natural resources that we have in abundance in Australia, and they are acting in the suburbs and the regions across Australia. People are lining their roofs with solar panels. One in three households now have rooftop solar. That's four million installations nationwide. More than 120,000 household batteries have been installed since 1 July under our programs. We're seeing record sales of EVs.

Australians get the science. They look out their window and they read, and the minimum they expect of coalition senators and members is that they do the same. The opposition wants to take us back to the Dark Ages. We fundamentally reject that. We are leading with conviction— (Time expired)