Mr TED O'BRIEN (Fairfax) (16:59): I'm delighted to stand today to speak on the Offshore Electricity Infrastructure Legislation Amendment Bill 2022. This legislation builds on the legal framework established by the coalition. Offshore energy infrastructure has the potential to create significant investment and job creation opportunities, as well as to contribute to Australia's future energy security. That is why, when in government, the coalition delivered on a 2019 election commitment and passed legislation to enable the development of offshore electricity infrastructure and provide industry with the certainty it needed to invest in Australian offshore electricity infrastructure projects. The Offshore Electricity Infrastructure Bill 2021 established a regulatory framework that covers all phases of development, from construction through to decommission, of generation and transmission projects. These bills were designed to help the implementation of critical underwater transmission projects, such as Marinus Link, the proposed 1,500-megawatt transmission line between Tasmania and Victoria. Marinus Link will unlock new investment in generation projects, including pumped hydro energy storage. It will help deliver a more reliable, affordable energy system, helping keep the lights on and helping prices go lower. The framework that we established also supported development of generation projects, including Star of the South, a proposed offshore wind project already under initial development off the coast of Gippsland, Victoria. There are at least 10 other offshore generation projects that have been proposed around Australia. The Offshore Electricity Infrastructure Bill 2021 provided a robust mechanism for granting licences to allow the development of offshore electricity projects in Commonwealth waters while providing protections for the safety of workers and strong protection of other maritime stakeholders. This was part of the decisive action that we took to deliver affordable, reliable energy for Australians. Households and businesses rely on affordable, reliable power to grow and to thrive. We saw the results under the coalition. Electricity prices under the coalition fell for households by 10 per cent; for small businesses 10 per cent; for industry 12 per cent. As an extension of the coalition's work, this bill that we have before us today is a reminder of our proud legacy as a coalition in this area. Australia was deploying new renewable capacity, particularly solar, faster than almost any other major economy in the world under the coalition. More than $40 billion had been invested in renewable energy since 2017. Record uptake of renewables over the last five years was seen under the coalition government. In 2021 Australia installed 6.1 gigawatts of renewable capacity, more than what was installed under the entirety of the previous Labor government from 2007 to 2013. Nearly one in three homes had installed solar on their roofs—the world's highest rate of uptake. Through ARENA and the Clean Energy Finance Corporation alone we invested over $11 billion in more than 800 clean energy projects with a total value exceeding $39 billion. That indeed is a legacy to be proud of. The majority of this bill that is before the House today has the coalition's support. I note that the government makes a number of minor amendments to the act. While the amendments are mostly non-controversial and the coalition supports the ongoing development of Australia's offshore wind industry, a notable amendment with which I have a problem is that the minister, rather than the regulator, will be given the powers to decide what forms and amounts of financial security licence holders must provide and when these obligations must cease under regulations. The coalition believes this proposed amendment, that allows the minister rather than the regulator to decide matters relating to the financial security of licence holders, risks emboldening the government's plan to accelerate the rollout of renewable projects without sufficient community consultation—that is, without a social licence—and risks easier terms for licence holders than an independent authority might otherwise approve. Renewables will play a vitally important role in the future of our energy mix. We need to give renewables every chance of success. But the problem with the government's approach is that it is setting up renewables for failure and not success. They are doing this by putting pressure on renewables that defies economics and engineering. This will come at a cost and a high risk, a cost that will ultimately be paid and a risk ultimately borne by Australians, Australian consumers and Australian businesses. I, therefore, move a second reading amendment, which has been circulated in my name: That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words: "whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House: (1) notes that despite a promise to reduce household energy bills by $275, electricity prices have skyrocketed under this government and are forecast to rise by another 50 per cent in 2023; (2) notes energy reliability issues in the National Electricity Market under this government, forcing unprecedented interventions, and the Australian Energy Market Operator's forecast for further reliability issues over the next decade; (3) notes the impact of the above mentioned energy prices and reliability issues on Australian households, small businesses and industries at a time when they can least afford it; (4) notes this government's failure in policy, particularly the lack of new gas supply and premature closures of baseload generators without adequate replacement, risking too hasty a rollout of renewables and new transmission; (5) notes the concerns of regional communities that they will be steamrolled over by this government's target of 82 per cent renewables by 2030 which will require the installation of forty 7-megawatt wind turbines every month, more than 22,000 five hundred-watt solar panels every day and up to 28,000 kms of new poles and wires infrastructure; (6) notes the need for appropriate environmental consideration and approvals for all new projects, including care for bird life and sea life; (7) notes the importance of product stewardship and the need for improved solutions for waste management and landfill, including in identified onshore and offshore renewable energy zones; (8) notes the importance of maximising local procurement which will deliver job opportunities and community initiatives from regional energy infrastructure projects, especially in light of much of the content for offshore wind projects being imported; (9) notes the importance of transparency around each financial security deal approved by the Minister; and (10) criticises the Minister for failing to appreciate the importance of attaining a social license for major renewable and related infrastructure projects and notes that this sets renewables up for failure, not success". What the Labor government fails to understand is that the objective is to decarbonise the Australian economy and not to decapitate the Australian economy. The Minister for Climate Change and Energy boasts that the pathway he is leading the country down with respect to energy will be as transformative as the Industrial Revolution. If that is so, it goes to his irresponsibility that he would legislate for such a pathway without having his own department or Treasury do any economic modelling of the impact of his plan. The pathway that Labor is venturing down will fail. It will be a train wreck. There is a missionary zeal on the part of the minister, for which only Australian businesses and households will pay. Let me address some of the points raised in my amendment, and I will do so, time permitting, one by one. First is the broken promise of a $275 reduction in household power bills. Before the election, Labor promised Australian households they would reduce power bills by $275. This was not a once-off slip of the tongue—Labor made this core to their entire campaign, repeating that promise on 97 occasions. Fewer than six months have gone by since Labor were in power and they have left this promise—they have broken it and they are crab walking away. Not one sitting of parliament has taken place without either the Prime Minister, the minister or both refusing to answer a direct question with a direct answer on whether or not they will honour their promise to the Australian people of a $275 drop in household power bills. We heard from CEOs of the energy sector recently, making it very clear that prices haven't just gone up but will continue to go up. We had one CEO suggesting that prices will increase by another 35 per cent next year. Power bills have already gone up under Labor, and now they're going to go up another 35 per cent. But the Australian Energy Regulator has subsequently come out and told us that, no, prices by their account will go up by 50 per cent next year. That could be as much as $1,245 for an Australian household. Think about that: Australian households who were promised $275 coming off their electricity bills, and already facing skyrocketing prices, are now being told that under Labor's plan prices might go up over $1,200 just over the next 12 months. This is the extent of the duplicity of the Labor Party. This is the government that promised the Australian people one thing and have refused to confirm that they will honour that commitment ever since coming to office. The second point in the amendment is the increasing unreliability of the National Electricity Market, or NEM. I recall the energy minister assuring Australians in June that the grid was reliable and there was no risk of blackouts. Then, literally within days, the market operator took unprecedented intervention in the NEM. Why? For fear of blackouts. Already—so quickly—we saw a minister who was not across his brief and clearly did not understand the instability in the grid that their policies are driving. The Australian Energy Market Operator, AEMO, warned in their most recent Electricity statement of opportunities, which came out in August, that we are going to see growing reliability gaps in 2023. Really what they are saying is: they've made it bad and they're going to make it a lot worse. Alinta's CEO, Jeff Dimery, said, 'I think we're headed for failure unless things change significantly.' Energy Australia's CEO, Mark Collette, said, 'I am more concerned about a smooth energy transition than a year ago.' Australian industry cannot afford instability. This takes me to the third point in the amendment, and that is the impact of skyrocketing prices and a wobbling grid on Australian households and businesses. I'm sure I'm not the only member in this chamber who has spoken to senior citizens who struggled through winter and who are now very pleased that we're in this spring season and heading through to summer. In winter, there were seniors across our communities who at night were having to make the tough choice between eating dinner or turning on their heating, because prices were going up and they couldn't afford both. Like other colleagues in this chamber, I'm sure, I have spoken to families who are making really hard choices as the cost of living keeps going up. I've been talking to people who have genuinely said to me, 'I voted Labor because I thought the cost of living was going to be improved.' These are families who are doing it tough. Families who were promised that $275 would come off their power bills are now seeing their power bills skyrocket and are being told they're going to increase by another 50 per cent. This is the real impact on families and on seniors who are doing it tough across our country. Then you have the impact on businesses. Now, I've certainly been on the shop floor over the last few months. I've spoken to foundry workers and to steelmakers who are basically saying that, because of the increased cost of energy, shutting up shop is a real option. The Australian Workers Union, the AWU themselves, have already sent a warning that 800,000 manufacturing jobs in Australia are at risk because of these power prices—800,000 manufacturing jobs! That's not me. That's not the Liberal-National coalition. That's the Australian Workers' Union. Why? Because energy prices are skyrocketing, and this government does not have a plan to tackle that. They have a promise, but they won't honour that promise. The extraordinary irony here is that the minister is very quick to his feet to justify these bizarre energy policies, which the energy sector itself knows are setting up industry for failure, on the basis of climate change. When these energy-intensive businesses, our major remaining foundries and steelmakers, close in Australia, what operations will pick up the slack and fill the void? They will be operations in countries, like India and China, that are far higher emitters—and why wouldn't they? How does that reduce emissions for the planet? How is that good for climate change? That takes me to the fourth point in my amendment, which notes the policy failures that are accelerating the closure of baseload power and restricting dispatchability. Here we have the problem of Labor's unplanned and disorderly acceleration of renewable rollouts, along with transmission lines. If you look at recent announcements by AGL, Origin Energy, the Queensland government, the Victorian government, these will result in more than 20 gigawatts of coal fired generating capacity being shut down by 2035. That is well over three-quarters of our baseload capacity. The problem is this: as the government supports and welcomes these announcements, they know there is no guarantee of a replacement in time. This represents an enormous problem. If we are talking about over three-quarters of baseload capacity being ripped out of the system by 2035 without any guarantee of a replacement, what does that mean to not just prices but industry—keeping the lights on? People like to compare Australia to Germany, saying we are following a German model of a great, hasty rush to renewables and the closure of baseload power and we are setting ourselves up for danger. But don't offend Germany in that! Because we are seeing recently that Germany are turning back on their baseload power stations. They had the common sense to mothball their power stations so that if a crisis hit they could turn them back on. That is their plan B. In Australia much of the fleet that we're closing are not being mothballed. They are being entirely demolished—gone. Let's not forget that we are a vast island. We're not landlocked. We don't have extension cords importing electricity from other nations, like they do in Europe. In other words, if Labor's plan A fails—and it will fail—there is no plan B, none whatsoever. The fifth point in my amendment was concern that regional communities feel that they might be steamrolled. This is an important one, because in a listening tour that I have done over recent months across regional Australia, I have to say that Australians are in no way against renewables. They don't have an aversion to renewables. That's not the issue at all. I think most Australians, like the coalition, believe renewables have a really important role to play. But where they are concerned is that they are seeing a missionary zeal on the part of the minister and this government to roll out renewables at a scale and a speed which puts a big question mark over social licence. Communities in regional Australia rightly feel that the Labor Party is so hellbent on rolling out so many renewables and transmission lines in such a short period of time that their communities will be rolled over. Think of the extent of Labor's plan, which again is 40 wind turbines per month, over 22,000 solar panels every day, all the way up to 2030. Think about that—all the way up to 2030. Plus 28,000 kilometres of transmission lines. Is it any wonder regional communities are worried? Can you imagine if you were in regional Australia today, concerned about this, that you might have a carpeting across your community and you listen to question time, where the opposition put genuine questions to the government and could not get one straight answer? Why? Because the government hasn't planned for it. Is it any wonder this is going to be a train wreck in Australia because this government has not planned for its transition. That is why regional Australia, along with, especially, those from the energy sector, are so deeply concerned about where this government is taking this agenda. Sixth, we need an appropriate set of environmental considerations. We have to be mindful that, as much as renewables have an important role to play, they, like every technology, have weaknesses. We know some of their weaknesses when it comes to their lack of dispatch ability, which is why they need gas to support them. They need complementary technologies, gas just being part of the equation. But we also have to recognise that there are other environmental weaknesses of renewables, especially when it comes to wind farms: it is birdlife and it is sea life, and these need to be prioritised in any assessment of offshore wind farms. Seventh is the importance of product stewardship, and this is important because I have heard some extraordinary stories going across Australia about renewable products being dumped. If you think about the toxicity of solar panels and of batteries, the vast majority are going to landfill. There is no plan whatsoever. There is no solution to managing waste. Product stewardship, therefore, has to be a core element in any such legislation that we are dealing with today, especially if we are looking at literally over 22,000 solar panels every single day with a very short lifespan compared to baseload plants. That waste management must be put as a priority of the government. Eighth is the importance of maximising local procurement. These projects must provide an economic boost to communities. We are very cognisant of the fact that much of the content for offshore wind farms will be coming from overseas, but where we have regional areas impacted most by these projects they are also the areas that must benefit most from procurement opportunities. Ninth is the importance of transparency around financial security for deals approved by the minister. As noted earlier, one of the amendments that the Labor government is seeking to arrange here is for the minister, not the regulator, to make decisions with respect to financial security. If a licence holder has to agree to a certain amount of security to cover activities such as decommission—how that is done, whether it be a banknote, whether it be a letter of credit, how long those obligations need to last—and if the minister ends up being responsible for such decisions, then transparency becomes absolutely key. Tenth is the failure of the minister to appreciate the importance of attaining a social licence. There is no more important prerequisite for major energy projects that impact local communities than a social licence. This comes to the heart of where I believe the Labor Party is going wrong with the pathway they have chosen to decarbonise the Australian economy, a pathway that will ultimately decapitate the Australian economy. Despite what they told the Australian people, power prices are skyrocketing under this Labor government. The electricity grid is wobbling and becoming unreliable. Local communities are fearful at the pace of accelerated rollouts of 28,000 kilometres of transmission lines, 22,000 solar panels every day and 40 wind turbines a month. They are worried. Once the Australian people see their way of life threatened and see the nation's energy security threatened, they will have had enough, and they will say, 'Enough.' It is at that time that we will see that the Labor government has basically broken the unwritten compact with the Australian people on climate change and energy. The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Mr Georganas ): Is the amendment seconded? Mr Stevens: I second the amendment and reserve my right to speak. Debate adjourned.