Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I table a revised explanatory memorandum relating to the bill and move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

I seek leave to have the second reading speech incorporated in Hansard.

Leave granted.

The speech read as follows—

In December 2024, important amendments to the Offshore Electricity Infrastructure Regulations (the OEI Regulations) were introduced to clarify my legislative powers when making decisions on feasibility licence applications for offshore renewable energy projects.

The effect of those regulation amendments was to ensure that the Offshore Electricity Infrastructure licensing scheme operated as intended. Those regulation amendments:

However, currently these regulation amendments only apply to licence applications made after their commencement. That means applications submitted before the OEI Regulations were amended would be treated differently to applications submitted subsequent to the amendments, and result in unfair outcomes for different applications.

This bill seeks to ensure a consistent approach to all feasibility licence applications, regardless of when they have been made, by ensuring that the regulation amendments apply to applications made prior to their commencement.

Passage of this bill will ensure that the licensing scheme operates consistently and equally for all applicants and licence holders regardless of when their applications were made. These changes will improve scheme administration, provide regulatory certainty to applicants and licence holders, and, importantly, support the continued development of a high quality and high integrity offshore renewables industry in Australia.

I commend this bill.

Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to move a motion relating to the referral of the Electricity Infrastructure Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 to a Senate inquiry, as circulated.

Andrew Bragg (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Home Ownership) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We're in the second reading debate.

Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, I will scratch what I've just said and get on with the second reading debate. You're going to be in for a lovely morning, everyone.

Ladies and gentlemen, when we think we know what's going on we clearly don't. That's because of what has just happened here, colleagues, with this Labor-Greens dodgy dirty deal on a Thursday—the last sitting Thursday of this parliamentary term. What we have just seen in their attempt to ram this ridiculous piece of legislation through the Senate is, as I said before, a window into the future, a crystal ball moment in which we know exactly what's going to happen under a Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Greens leader Adam Bandt government. It will be a Labor-Greens government where we will, of course, be left with a Greens tail wagging a Labor dog.

Bringing this bill on to have it rammed through the parliament today was contrived as part of some dodgy deal between the two coalition parties: the Australian Labor Party, the former friend of the worker; and the Australian Greens political party. You had the Manager of Government Business in the Senate and the Leader of the Government in the Senate in here watching over to make sure that this deal was brought to fruition. It's very disappointing to see this. We have Australian households in a cost-of-living crisis. The reality is that the legislation before us, the Electricity Infrastructure Legislation Amendment Bill 2025, does nothing to address the problems that we have in this country. Any occupant of this chamber—any senator from anywhere in the country—would be aware of the fact that Australians are struggling under the cost of living.

One of the biggest portions of the pressure that these households and businesses are facing is energy prices. This is not a new problem. This is something Australians have now been struggling with for the better part of 2½ years. Before the last election, the Prime Minister told Australians 97 times that their power prices would go down by $275 a year. It's a figure that, in a very Trotskyite type of way, the Labor Party have tried to scratch from history. No-one refers to this $275 figure anymore. It's like it never happened. But, of course, it was a key element in the promises that was made to Australian households. It was a key element of the Australian Labor Party's offering to the Australian people. I remember the Prime Minister saying to Australians, 'My word is my bond.' His word was, in this case, that, when it came to power prices, Australians would be $275 better off under his government than under the alternative. Well, if we fast-forward the clock and we forget about the 97 times that promise was made on this issue—that is, again, just for clarity, that Australian households and businesses would be $275 better off—the reality is that here we are, nearly three years on from the election, and it's gone in the opposite direction. On average, we have households now paying $1,000 more per year than they were at the date when that promise was made. Far from being just a broken promise, it is an abject failure of government to do what they owe to the Australian community. It isn't just about honouring promises, about making sure that the bond that was offered to the Australian people is honoured; it's about actually doing the right thing by Australian households and finding ways to bring down energy prices.

With that as context, why are we here, on the eve of an election, debating legislation that will do nothing to help the government honour its election promises and nothing to help Australian households with the burden of skyrocketing power prices, amongst all of the other cost-of-living issues we have? It is because, as I said before, we are staring into the looking glass at what a Labor-Green government would look like. It demonstrates the tone-deaf nature of this Labor-Green outfit that, in all the contributions we hear—I wonder whether we will hear about the cost of living from government speakers on this legislation. I'm not wondering whether we will hear about the cost of living from Greens speakers. That is not part of their lexicon. They do not refer to this issue that impacts most Australians, because it doesn't suit their narrative. And that is because, when you go with Greens ideals, when you follow the Greens path, when the Labor dog is being wagged by the Greens tail, nothing helps with the cost of living.

As I said earlier when we were debating whether we should be rushing this legislation through—legislation, I might also point out, that will not be subject to any legislative scrutiny now because of this dodgy dirty deal—when you follow the Greens pathway, as this government sadly is today under the supervision of the Leader of the Government in the Senate and the Manager of Government Business in the Senate, who were here watching to make sure that the Greens got their wishes, you can be guaranteed that Australians will be worse off. Anything the Greens say is a good idea you can take as read is a bad idea. It is anti-jobs, it is anti cost-of-living relief and it is against what Australians actually need. To have a party of government teaming up on the eve of an election to give effect to this terrible, economically destructive, job-destroying agenda that applies further pressure to households is, frankly, an alarming development. But it is not surprising. As we head off from this building this afternoon, I suspect we won't be coming back, given the government's desire to pass all of this legislation in a hurried fashion and to tick the boxes with their inner-city-elite voters, who like the sorts of things that this government is trying to rush through. This is a preview of what we will have from this government.

Tim Ayres (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

More electricity, good jobs.

Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'll take the interjection from the assistant minister. He says that we will have more electricity. Well, I'm afraid we have a situation where we are facing blackouts because of the unreliability of the source of generation that this government chooses, which is intermittent and unreliable, to the exclusion of all other technologies, and they refuse to talk about other technologies. They don't want to work with coal energy generators to extend the life of power stations. They don't want to actually work with gas producers to bring more on for domestic consumption because, of course, in the cities—

Andrew Bragg (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Home Ownership) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The interjections are disorderly.

Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Unless I take them, of course. Unfortunately, the assistant minister is incorrect because he, like all of his colleagues, lives in an alternative universe. They don't do anything about the cost of living, and this legislation will not help at all. It will not help with grid reliability; it will not help with expanding the offering of energy available to the grid. You go out and talk to manufacturers as well. We've gone to talk to manufacturers—

Tim Ayres (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Go and tell that to the people of Bell Bay—

Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I might just take that interjection.

Tim Ayres (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Assistant Minister for Trade) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's the Dutton plan to offshore aluminium.

Andrew Bragg (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Home Ownership) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Senator Duniam, resume your seat. Minister, as you know, interjections are very disorderly, so I ask you to restrain yourself, please.

Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Those interjections were disorderly but amusing nonetheless because they are a glimpse into the alternative universe that this government lives in driven by green ideology rather than reality. They talk about offshoring aluminium manufacturing. Can I say, when you've got a government that brings in this draconian safeguard mechanism, which is offshoring aluminium smelting jobs, if you go out and talk to the high-vis army working in these smelters, they will tell you what this government's policies have done. They will tell you what the cost of energy is doing to their capacity to manufacture in this country. They will tell you what it's doing to their workforce, which is decreasing because we are being outpriced by our competitors from countries where they don't care about the environment, emissions or workers rights.

Those opposite are happy to see that happen all in the name of green ideology because they know, as every pollster does, as the bookies know and as we are tracking today, that the Labor Party is set to win in minority with the Greens political party down the end. Therefore, we need to make sure that they think we're on the same page before the election. We are going to see the offshoring of jobs under this plan, and if the minister or any other government senator wants to tell me—or workers in smelters in Bell Bay, for that matter—that this legislation is going to help them then I would love to know what happens when we exclude all other sources of energy generation, as this government does. They exclude consideration of every other technology and every other source of energy generation because it is all about the green agenda, as I said.

The green agenda is failing Australians, but it is one this government has signed up to. You've got to understand that, if you go out doorknocking, people aren't saying, 'Yes, I know it's going to cost a bit more, but we'll go along with it; I know it might affect grid reliability, but we'll go along with it.' They're saying, 'No, please honour your promise and bring down power prices by $275.' That's what they're after, that's what they were promised, and I don't think it's wrong for us to point that out. When you talk to manufacturers who struggle with the cost of compliance with the safeguard mechanism and struggle with these skyrocketing electricity prices and industrial relations laws which have made the ability to compete internationally very, very difficult, they're not saying, 'This government has got our interests at heart.' Therefore, by extension, the government does not have those manufacturers' employees' interests at heart, because what does an employee in a company want? They want a job, but we are eroding certainty around employment. This legislation will absolutely harm the capacity of people in Bell Bay.

It'll harm the capacity of people on the West Coast of Tasmania at the MMG mine or, of course, the Port Latta—

Andrew Bragg (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Home Ownership) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Point of order, Senator O'Sullivan?

Matt O'Sullivan (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm only seated about a metre away from Senator Duniam, and I am struggling to hear him over the interjections from the minister, no less, sitting over on the other side.

Andrew Bragg (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Home Ownership) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think the degree of interjection is quite high at the moment, so I ask you to restrain yourself, please, Minister.

Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Normally we do listen in respectful silence, of course, but it is hard to restrain yourself when you're confronted with the truth. It is very, very hard.

As I was saying, if you go to the Port Latta pelletising plant in Braddon, I'll tell you what: they're not looking at this legislation and going, 'Yes, this is excellent for us; it's going to help us keep operating here, in a globally competitive environment where prices are going down overseas, our dollar is making it hard to export and, of course, the prices of doing things here in this country—to manufacture what it is we take out of the ground and value-add to—are going up.' They are now drawing big question marks over their operations, because of government policy. That's in the seat of Braddon. That's a very, very important seat. In the seat of Lyons, you've got this government—in addition to driving up power prices, as it will with this bill—casting uncertainty over a range of industries, including the salmon industry.

Here we are, on the eve of an election, with a government that will stick its head in the sand to deny the claims being made not just by us here in opposition but by employers out there who, of course, want to do well, which in turn means employees do well. They have jobs, they can pay their bills and they get paid more when they are able to compete on the international stage. But we are pricing them out of the market, and that's what industry is saying. They have said it countless times, whether it relates to the Nature Positive Plan—this ridiculous green agenda—to the safeguard mechanism, which is also part of the green agenda this government has adopted, or to the industrial relations changes which were rammed through without much consultation with industry.

Here we are now furthering the green ideology this government has adopted, again demonstrating how out of touch it is with Australian businesses and Australian workers. I don't think there will be many people in regional communities celebrating what this legislation does. You can almost be guaranteed that anything the Australian Greens back is bad for jobs, apart from in the inner city or perhaps in government run offices. So that is always a warning sign, as well as the fact that the government is so happily signing up to this and happily allowing the Greens to run the agenda here today. We've got to remember that it was the Greens who moved a motion to ensure that debate on this legislation concludes today—that they get their bill through—and we tried to ensure that there would be scrutiny applied to these bills. But, of course, all of the shrill cries about what happened over the course of the last couple of days don't matter anymore, particularly when it comes to our little Greens-Labor agenda.

In conclusion, we've just been given another glimpse into what the world will look like if we, unfortunately, wake up the day after the election with a Labor-Greens government. It will be bad for our economy, bad for jobs and, most importantly, as demonstrated by the legislation pushed in here and pushed through the Senate by the Greens, bad for the cost of living. I think Australians need to know that. I'm pleased we had, what, a dozen votes this morning where Labor and the Greens voted together to get their green ideology across the line, because that's exactly what the world is going to look like after they get their hands on the Treasury benches together.

Larissa Waters (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm very pleased to rise to speak to the Electricity Infrastructure Legislation Amendment Bill 2025 today. The Greens will always fight for clean energy. We will always fight for the thousands and thousands of jobs that that will provide in the regions, including in my home state of Queensland. We will always fight to stop a future Dutton led government from undermining the clean energy sector, because they don't accept the climate science and are instead propping up coal and gas with the fig leaf of nuclear.

I'm absolutely thrilled that we were able to secure the chamber's support to make sure that we passed this bill today. I'm very pleased that some of the crossbench voted with us to make sure that, if we're not finished debating this bill by one o'clock, we can actually vote on it. What we're voting on here is about making sure that the government can continue to back in renewable energy. Thanks to the amendment that the Greens were able to make in the other place, that's precisely what this bill can now do. Originally it had a slightly different—but also good—purpose.

In order to protect the renewables sector from a future Dutton government, we've managed to put into law the Capacity Investment Scheme, which is the government's underwriting of clean energy projects. To put that in English: this bill, thanks to the Greens amendment in the House, will now protect 32 gigawatts of clean energy in law, and it would take both chambers to undo that. Even if we get a Dutton led minority government in the other place, I don't think they're going to be able to get the numbers in the Senate. I'm really pleased that today we'll be able to lock into law support for clean energy.

We've seen many communities and individuals across the country take the opportunity of clean, renewable energy to power their homes, farms, community services and businesses. With proper support for communities we can build prosperity and a safe climate by decarbonising our energy systems. That's what this bill seeks to do: provide certainty for communities and the industry in a renewables rollout. As I mentioned, we've improved it further by Dutton-proofing the Capacity Investment Scheme. The Capacity Investment Scheme is the government's key policy to reduce emissions and to achieve the 82 per cent renewables target by 2030. Right now, prior to this bill passing, it's very vulnerable to sabotage by the Dutton coalition because it was only created by regulation. The Leader of the Opposition could dismantle it on day 1 of getting into the Lodge—if he gets there, if the various folk in the other place decide to support a Dutton minority. If it were repealed, renewables investment would come to a grinding halt.

The Greens amendment, which passed the House, which is now incorporated in the bill that's before the Senate, would enshrine the government's Capacity Investment Scheme into law. That means that our amendment has Dutton-proofed the Capacity Investment Scheme. It cannot be unilaterally repealed if there were to be a coalition government or minority government. By enshrining it into law it will oblige the next two governments to meet the 32-gigawatt renewables and storage target by 2030. That's made up of 23 gigawatts of renewable generation and nine gigawatts of dispatchable energy. That will ensure that critical investment in the renewables rollout can continue smoothly. As many folk know, that's important for creating market confidence, and it's essential for the rapid decarbonisation that's needed to address the climate crisis.

So the Greens are using their balance-of-power position in parliament to push for better climate outcomes by Dutton-proofing it from the climate destruction of the LNP. The Liberals and the coal and gas industry are doing everything they can to slow down action on the climate crisis. They're spruiking nuclear, which, as we all know, would simply prolong coal and gas, and they're pouring time and money into undermining the transition to renewables. We've seen ridiculous billboards by the likes of Advance Australia. We've seen anti-offshore wind community campaigns. We've seen the National Party whip up fear in the community about renewable energy. I don't see them standing with the same farmers when it comes to coal or coal seam gas wrecking farmland, but, hey, they clearly pick their battles.

What we've also seen in the news this week is that Australia has already shot past 1½ degrees of warming and that the world is on track for a catastrophic 3.1 degrees of warming. We have got to be doing absolutely everything we can to decarbonise as rapidly as possible. We've got to transition to 100 per cent renewables as soon as we can. We cannot afford to have existing policies slide backwards, which is exactly why we moved to Dutton-proof this key emissions reduction policy.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Waters, you need to refer to members of the other place by their correct titles.

Larissa Waters (Queensland, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My apologies—Mr Dutton. We've moved to Mr Dutton-proof this key emissions reduction policy and to lock in renewables investment.

That is obviously crucial, but we cannot keep pouring fuel on the fire. Renewables investment has to be accompanied by no new coal, oil or gas. Unfortunately, under the Albanese government, we know that emissions have actually gone up, which is frankly gobsmacking. Perhaps part of the reason for that is that 32 coal and gas projects, either new or expanded, have been approved by the Albanese Labor government. Without a commitment to stop subsidising coal and gas to the tune of $11 billion of taxpayer money and without that commitment to stop opening new coal and gas fields that are simply turbocharging the climate crisis, you're cutting off your nose to spite your face. We are risking the future of our climate, our environment and our economy and we will continue to be out the back of the pack internationally.

Australia's future is in clean energy, not fossil fuels, and this bill is an important step to lock in renewable investment and to provide more certainty for communities and industry, but we've got to get on with the rest of the job. We are strongly in support of the 82 per cent renewables by 2030 target. We'd like it to be higher, and we can do that in a way that actually shores up the economic future of regional communities. We know that renewables are not only the cheapest form of energy, which is great news for households, but they are job rich, and they are safe jobs. They're not coalmining jobs, where you come down with black lung disease or get sacked by your mega coal company because you've been replaced by a robot. We can have a job-rich, clean energy transition that's smooth, and that's why we're backing this bill today. Government underwriting for the renewables sector is crucial, and it will help even out the peaks and troughs.

This is us adapting and trying to make that transition to a clean energy economy. I'm so pleased that we were able to get the support of those in the chamber and in the other place to do that today to make sure that those good targets—they're not as strong as they should be, but they're good—are now in law and can't be just undone by the stroke of a pen should Mr Dutton assume control of the country. But you can't just do good renewables stuff; you've got to stop approving coal and gas. It's one step forward and two steps back. This is why we will continue to insist that there be no new coal and gas approved. That will always be what the Greens work for, and that will always be on the table for any kind of minority government negotiations should the country lead us to that outcome.

We're here for climate action. We're here for providing those jobs in regional communities. They know that the writing is on the wall for the coal industry. They know that their jobs are on the line and that they'll be sacked the minute it's cheaper for a robot to do their jobs than it is for a person. They deserve to have a bright economic future. They deserve to have a say in determining what is the next underpinning for the prosperity for their town. That's exactly why we will always stand with those coal and gas workers and we will always make sure that they've got options for well-paying jobs locally in their community.

We are sick of the coal and gas companies running our country. We are sick of them running this parliament. We have tried to ban donations from coal and gas companies. Unfortunately, nobody else seems to agree that that is a good idea. They're perfectly happy for the oligarchs in the coal and gas companies to be in control of decision-making. Maybe that's why in every budget, no matter who's in government, you get $11 billion of taxpayer money given to the big coal oil and gas companies. Cheap diesel and accelerated depreciation are perks that no other industry gets. But, when it comes to the coal and gas industry, they say: 'Eleven billion dollars? Yes, sir. You'd like us to jump? How high, sir?' That is, sadly, what both of the big parties say when it comes to the coal, oil and gas industries. We will always say you could use that $11 billion you are giving to coal and gas to let people go to the doctor for free, to make sure they can go to the dentist and use their Medicare card and not their credit card or to make sure that public schools are fully funded and teachers are getting properly paid. There are so many better ways to spend money than propping up the coal and gas industry, and we need to do that.

We need to make sure we're not opening new coal and gas in a climate crisis when we're already at 1½ degrees. We know the impact that that will have globally on coral reefs, and that includes the Great Barrier Reef in my home state of Queensland. We're going to lose 90 per cent of coral cover at 1½ degrees of warming, and, if that keeps ticking up and we get to even two degrees of warming, we know that 100 per cent of coral cover will be lost. That's 60,000 jobs that we're talking about losing, not to mention losing one of the seven natural wonders of the world. The future of our communities and the future of our environment is at stake, and that is why we're so proud that we have 'Dutton-proofed' this renewable energy investment scheme. But Labor have to stop approving new coalmines and gas projects. They have to stop giving $11 billion of taxpayer money to coal, oil and gas when they should be investing that in communities for the services that all of us rely on, like schools and hospitals. Maybe they could even subsidise solar and batteries for small businesses and for homes to really further kick along that renewables transition.

Karen Grogan (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What a rich amount of interesting commentary to respond to here! The desperation of Senator Duniam was quite outstanding. I'm not entirely sure what he's so scared of, or is he just trying to get enough social media grabs to run some form of scare campaign that has no basis in reality? Any which way, I don't know that he really referenced any part of the actual bill in his commentary, so it could be that we need to go through some of those elements so that people are really clear about the content of the Electricity Infrastructure Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. I don't think there was anything that Senator Duniam said that actually has any basis in the intent of this legislation.

Let's just be really clear: there is no majority in this chamber. There is no majority party in here. We, as the Albanese Labor government, invite every single senator across this chamber—it doesn't matter who you are—to embrace the great Labor agenda that we have set. We encourage you to come forward and support it because we do believe it is the future. It is where we should be going to protect jobs, to build our economy and to ensure we have a clean and sustainable future. In the context of this bill, that is a clean energy future with more manufacturing, better jobs and a stronger economy, making more of what we need right here at home with clean energy from the abundant renewable resources that we have in this country. We are luckier than so many parts of the world. The abundance of available resources for renewable energy is amazing, and what we are trying to do is harness it. What those opposite are trying to do is to go back to the Dark Ages and not embrace that clean energy future that the majority of the rest of the world is embracing. So let's go to a little bit of what this bill is actually about.

Jonathon Duniam (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Environment, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Cost of living.

Karen Grogan (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, Senator Duniam, this bill is not about the cost of living. I think, perhaps, you should have read the bill.

An opposition senator: That's a social media grab.

Sure—the desperation of those opposite to get a social media grab that they can misconstrue and misquote is absolutely disgraceful. The desperation that you are showing, Senator Duniam, is outstanding. I don't think I've ever seen you so desperate.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Grogan, please direct your comments to me. Those on my left, listen in silence.

Karen Grogan (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My apologies, President. I just won't look at Senator Duniam, because I am tempted to address some of the commentary he made. But I will go back to the bill, because someone needs to talk about what this piece of legislation is actually about.

Let's be clear, this is a bill to address an issue. What might not be clear, from the commentary we have had so far, is that the coalition designed and passed the enabling legislation to establish the offshore wind industry. From the commentary we've heard so far today, you wouldn't know or grasp that. You would think that they've always hated offshore and onshore wind—hell, any form of renewable energy doesn't seem to be their bag. But no, they passed the enabling legislation—

Andrew Bragg (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Home Ownership) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's true.

Karen Grogan (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you for the nod, Senator Bragg, acknowledging that that's exactly what you did, which was great. As it was originally legislated, the bill was designed to ensure that the most meritorious projects received feasibility licences so that they could start their work and develop their projects.

Andrew Bragg (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Home Ownership) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's been maladministered.

Karen Grogan (SA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm not sure if you developed it for maladministration, Senator Bragg, but I'm pretty sure it was about trying to ensure that the most meritorious projects got up. The applications were assessed against very clear guidelines and very clear criteria, but a successful court challenge has placed 12 of those feasibility licences and two preliminary decisions at significant risk.

Those potential delays in critical projects are forcing the developments into less suitable locations and injecting an awful lot of unnecessary uncertainty into the industry. In response, the Labor government took swift action to ensure that this great enabling legislation, passed by the coalition back in the days when they were a bit less desperate but still ineffective—in December, the minister signed the Offshore Electricity Infrastructure Amendment (Overlapping Applications) Regulations 2024, ensuring that, moving forward, feasibility licences would be granted only to the best projects in the case of overlap. But these regulations don't apply retroactively, meaning that the current applications are not all treated consistently.

I can see that everybody is enthralled by this deep explanation of a piece of legislation that's fixing up a challenge, but that's where we are at. This is what it's actually about, not some of the bunkum you've heard from the other side around this legislation. This is to ensure that our wind industry can grow and progress, because offshore wind is going to provide an enormous, valuable resource to this country to enable us—in a clean, green and sustainable fashion—to build our manufacturing, to ensure we have great jobs into the future and to ensure that we are supporting the regions.

The kinds of places that we are looking at, with these wind resources, are places that have traditionally provided us with our energy sources. There is the project in Gippsland, which is set to come online in 2030, and then we have zones in the Hunter, the Southern Ocean, Illawarra, Bass Strait and Bunbury. This is an economic driver. This industry will be a game changer if we just continue on the same pathway that, once upon a time, this whole chamber was in agreement over. In fact, in 2021 the support of the Greens, the support of Labor, the support of the Nationals, the support of the Liberals—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Grogan, you will be in continuation. We've hit the hard marker.