Ted O'Brien
Fairfax · Liberal Party · Australia
“My question goes to the Prime Minister. Over recent weeks, shots have been fired at an Australian Border Force vessel from an illegal boat. We've seen the biggest seizure of cocaine in Australia's history, with police believing the drugs were imported by sea.”
“Too many businesses on the Sunshine Coast are closing. A local business is far more than just a business; it is the sponsor of local footy clubs. They're the ones who pay the salaries to local employees. They're the ones who do the hard work. Behind all the shopfronts we might see across the Sunshine Coast lies a personal story.”
“This is what is happening to local communities right across this country, and this government is showing absolute disregard for small business. It's why, on 8 July, I will host an 'Understanding the Budget' forum, so local businesses on the Sunshine Coast in my area of Fairfax can understand what the Labor Party is doing to them.”
“Australia is drifting. That is the conclusion from the Committee for the Economic Development of Australia's 2026 State of the nation report. Productivity, investment and innovation are going backwards. Knowledge, skills and workforce are going backwards.”
“They lie awake at night not knowing if they can make payroll. They do not know if their employees will have enough money to put food on the table for their own families. This is symptomatic of a decline of our national economy, felt on the ground at home in my communities.”
“You do not make an economy more competitive by taking away opportunities for entrepreneurs. You do not make an economy more competitive by treating profit making as a sin. If this government was so sure about increasing taxes, it should have had the courage to take it to the Australian people at last year's election. (Time expired)”
The complete record
Every one of 271 lines we hold for Ted O'Brien, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 5 of 6.
“In Australia, thanks to the Labor Party and the Greens, this issue has become politicised because the left of politics in Australia want to make this an ideological battle. Yet, as you look around the world, what you see in other like democracies is an enormous amount of bipartisanship when it comes to nuclear energy. Much has been seen and heard of US politics of late, on the back of last year's presidential election and indeed the new Trump administration's decisions. Yet, in the United States, of all the partisanship, indeed some might say hyperpartisanship, both sides of Congress unite on one key thing: the importance of nuclear energy. It is why you see other like nations all around the world, unlike Australia, having bipartisanship on this technology.”
“But there are a string of other nations in our own region which are now moving towards adopting nuclear energy. These include Bangladesh, Myanmar, Laos, Vietnam, Thailand, Cambodia, Malaysia, Philippines, Sri Lanka and Indonesia. All of these nations in our own region are joining other nations across the world in adopting nuclear energy. We also heard evidence, including from the International Atomic Energy Agency, about the importance of nuclear energy internationally. They say that nuclear energy is already one of the largest sources of zero emissions electricity globally and that it supplies about 10 per cent of global electricity and over 25 per cent of all clean electricity. As you look internationally, there's also a difference when it comes to nuclear energy.”
“Australians also know that nuclear technology underpins livelihoods by virtue of our world-class uranium and having the largest reserves of uranium in the world, already supplying jobs and incomes for many Australians, with enormous unlocked opportunity. So, as an already nuclear nation, what this inquiry proved was that adopting nuclear energy is the next step in Australia's journey. What we also saw in this inquiry is that Australia is, in fact, isolated internationally by not adopting nuclear energy. Australia is the only nation of all advanced economies—the only nation in the G20—which is neither using nuclear energy today nor moving towards doing so. We are isolated internationally. In our own region of the world, we know the big players when it comes to nuclear energy. We know China. We know India. We know South Korea.”
“I seek leave to make a statement on this inquiry report. Leave granted. Australia already is a nuclear nation. Australians know that nuclear technology saves lives. They know that nuclear technology protects lives. They know that nuclear technology underpins livelihoods. On saving lives, Australians know the importance of our nuclear reactor, which sits just outside of Sydney's CBD, creating medical isotopes that help solve, identify and cure cancers. Australians know nuclear technology saves lives. Australians also know that nuclear technology protects lives, because both sides of this parliament have agreed to adopt nuclear propelled submarines, knowing full well that the best way to protect our nation is to invest in nuclear technology.”
“They also indicate that any threat to the existence of skates is due to a multitude of many different factors. Such findings are obviously also underscored by the fact that, unlike in Macquarie Harbour, the skate became all but extinct many years ago in Bathurst Harbour. That is an area of Tasmania in which salmon farming has never been practised. For all these reasons and many others, the strong view of the coalition is that the skate population and the salmon industry can clearly coexist sustainability at Macquarie Harbour, and that this provides the most balanced and positive outcome for everyone.”
“In keeping with this point, it is very important to note the significant findings of a wealth of scientific studies and observations over the last 15 months. These have included reports from the Tasmanian Environment Protection Authority, the Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies and Dr Ian Wallis and commentary from the University of Tasmania's Professor Barry Brook. Among other conclusions, these studies and observations have pointed to manifest improvements in water quality in Macquarie Harbour, to no further declines in recent years in numbers of skates, the threatened species, and instead to stabilisation and positive signs for growth and to major flaws in some of the original modelling that was provided to the Threatened Species Scientific Committee.”
“Reductions or closures of the salmon-farming industry's operations on the west coast of Tasmania, as seems to have long been the minister's plan, would cause thousands of direct and indirect job losses. These impacts would be devastating at a local level, including by threatening the entire existence of the town of Strahan and other nearby regional communities, because there are simply no obvious replacement industries or adequate employment possibilities in those areas. The coalition have said on many occasions that we believe this minister's approach has been reprehensible. It has provided none of the necessary urgency or certainty and, in the case of the salmon workers in particular, has only created heightened anxiety and stress. Science should have been better respected.”
“It won't surprise anyone—certainly, it won't surprise the people of Tasmania, especially those in the salmon industry—that Australia now suffers from the second-highest level of green lawfare anywhere in the world. On the environment moreover, let's be clear that Australia should always strive to ensure that whatever we do in our country has minimal adverse impact on our unique and precious natural environment, and that includes ensuring that endangered species are protected. However, the Albanese government has completely failed to take the relevant steps to help improve the future prospects of either the species in question or the salmon workers.”
“Believe it or not, there are still some companies that have been waiting for the minister to finalise reconsideration processes for nearly the entirety of this term of government and, therefore, of her term as the relevant minister. Now, if, by way of this legislation, the Albanese government, albeit after being dragged kicking and screaming, has admitted that it has made mistakes, then you would think it should at least commit to serious reforms and not be half-hearted about it, as they are being, as evidenced through this bill. Being so half-hearted only has the implication of introducing further uncertainty about the rules for this industry and others well into the future.”
“Ours include a pious amendment that gives expression to some of the most immediate problems that would loom on the horizon for the industry and its workers, especially if the Labor Party were to win the next election and particularly if it were ultimately to form a minority government with the Greens. Each of our amendments is being moved not just in an attempt to better insulate the salmon industry from further outlandish reconsideration requests but also in recognition of the increasing vulnerability of all industries, companies and jobs that either have been implicated to date or are at risk of being targeted further in the future.”
“Let me echo the point made by Salmon Tasmania CEO Luke Martin on 21 March that this legislation is not by any means a complete fix. The legislation is also a long way from perfect with respect to the reconsideration regime in the EPBCA. It still needs several changes before it fully and adequately addresses the relevant matters, and we are, therefore, putting forward a series of amendments. If passed, the amendments we're putting forward will improve the reconsideration rules in the act to provide more certainty for everyone and will certainly reduce the ad hoc green lawfare that now proliferates against EPBCA decisions that have been settled—some, many years ago.”
“Of course, those errors and missteps trace all the way back to 2023, when the environment minister acquiesced to the wishes of three activist groups—the Bob Brown Foundation, the Australia Institute and the Albanese government funded Environmental Defenders Office—to place the entire existence of the industry, its workers and regional communities under severe threat. Outrageously, the minister has kept this review running right up until now and had no plans to end it even before the election. In the process, she created for Tasmanian workers, especially in the state's West Coast, what the local mayor Shane Pitt has described as 'cruel' and a 'living hell'. Clearly a lot of MPs in Labor would have liked the review to continue, but at least it does appear that this bill finally puts a halt to it.”
“Any pretence from Labor that they really want to help the salmon industry and the workers in Tasmania is a sick joke, because history exposes the truth. It is for these reasons and more that I moved an amendment at the front end of this address. The purpose of that amendment is to try and redress some of Labor's many errors and missteps in association with the bill they put forward today and to try to provide more certainty to communities across Tasmania, particularly the West Coast, north-west, east coast and beyond.”
“Putting the miserable internal machinations of the Labor government to one side, the very fact that salmon companies and workers in Tasmania need relief is a direct consequence of the minister's reckless decision to launch a full-throttle attack on this industry in the first place. For nearly 15 months, the government has left the industry exposed to a review that has placed their entire future in jeopardy, and it should be noted that it has resisted all sensible offers and advice from the coalition to set this right. As recently as the very last sitting week of this parliament—on 12 February, in fact—the Labor government voted against this very kind of legislation, when it was the coalition which brought it forward through a bill to help the salmon industry and change the EPBC reconsideration process.”
“This approach, if implemented, will cause another massive rise in green tape, severely damage investment in jobs and cause many further cost-of-living increases in the process. So it may look at first blush as though the Prime Minister has to find a way around the minister in order to close off this review, and there is indeed truth to that; there really is. But it is far deeper than even that. This is all about something far darker, and it is yet another marker of the dark arts of the Albanese Labor government playing politics for internal political processes, because a dirty deal has clearly been done.”
“To Labor, this legislation isn't principally about Tasmanian salmon workers and their families; it is about factional games, internal warfare and political fixes inside Labor itself. It's a reflection of a longstanding and intensifying feud not just between Prime Minister and environment minister but between many in the ranks of the Labor caucus on environmental policy. We have recently learnt about a heated debate within caucus itself where the Prime Minister has seemingly traded off. On one hand, he has won his desire to end the minister's review on the future of salmon farming in Tasmania, but on the other he has agreed to the minister again pursuing the creation of a federal environment protection authority and, of course, the disastrous nature-positive agenda.”
“The coalition will support this bill. We do so in recognition of the urgent need to put an end to the living hell that salmon businesses and workers in Tasmania have endured under this Albanese government and, in particular, through the actions of its environment minister. We have made the decision to support the bill's passage because it provides at least some small measure of comfort and relief to the Tasmanian salmon industry and its workers after a truly harrowing period. However, no-one should be fooled into thinking that this bill is to the Labor Party what its drafting may suggest. By way of this bill, Tasmanian salmon businesses and workers are being used as a bargaining chip in Labor's intensifying internal war on environmental issues.”
“I move: 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 notes that: (1) on the eve of a federal election, the Albanese Government has been forced to work around their own Environment Minister in an attempt to fix a political mess of their own making; (2) the Government remains bitterly divided on the future of salmon farming at Macquarie Harbour and has unleashed 15 months of anxiety and uncertainty on thousands of workers, families and communities who rely on the salmon industry, including voting against a Coalition bill to improve the reconsideration process in the most recent sitting week of Parliament; (3) this legislation is not needed to provide lasting certainty to the Tasmanian salmon industry, and instead the Government should simply have ended the Minister for the Environment's disastrous 2023 review of salmon farming's future at Macquarie Harbour; (4) the Government, and particularly the Environment Minister, must guarantee to not instigate other forms of legislation or regulations that will impose new controls or reviews on the salmon industry, including through the return of their Nature Positive legislation, Federal EPA or use of other forms of the EPBC Act, such as directed environmental audits; and (5) the changes to the reconsiderations regime in the Bill should be substantially strengthened to ensure that all assessments of all projects, across all industries, do not remain subject to the open-ended review processes that currently exist".”
“Can you imagine the damage they will wreak on the Australian economy and the Australian people if they're given yet another three years, let alone with the Greens and the teals as part of a minority government? I think the issue here is that the Labor Party does not understand the importance of the economy, nor do they understand how to manage the economy. They have, indeed, never worked in the economy. In fact, what you have is the Attorney-General giggling as he leaves in shame because he doesn't have real-world experience. Indeed, what you see—he's coming back now, the Attorney-General—is that he is like the rest of the front bench. They're nothing more than a sales and marketing department for the CFMEU—”
“Australians already know, after just one term of this government, that their standard of living has dropped more than in any other developed nation in the world, bar none. Australians are copping it. Their standard of living has dropped woefully. There is not a developed nation in the world where residents are feeling a drop in their way of life worse than Australians are. That is a direct consequence of this Labor government. If you look at the skyrocketing prices for food, education, health, housing, rent, insurance, electricity and gas, all of these have had at least double-digit rises in prices. In some cases there have been rises of over 20 per cent. In other cases, such as insurance, gas and electricity, it has been over 30 per cent. Prices have gone up. How's that for a track record for just one term in government?”
“Let me start with some truisms: (1) Australia is the greatest country in the world; (2) the Albanese government is the worst government in Australian history; and (3) only a Dutton led coalition government can get Australia back on track. As we come to this next federal election, there is only one key question that Australians really need to ask themselves: do they feel better today than they did three years ago? Even in this chamber, the echo is no. When the Australian people do answer that question and say, 'No, we don't feel better,' they know that the last thing they should do in the ballot box is vote for a Labor candidate. But there is one thing worse than another term of the Albanese Labor government, and that is a term of a Labor-Green-Teal minority government.”
“As part of that, we have announced that we will be extending the asset value eligible for the instant asset write-off up to $30,000 and making it permanent. We'll be introducing a capped deduction of up to $20,000 for business related meal expenses, giving our hospitality sector the real boost it needs. On industrial relations, we'll be reversing the damaging aspects of Labor's complex industrial relations reforms, including returning to a simple definition of a 'casual worker'. In other areas, we'll be cutting red tape, we'll be making energy cheaper, cleaner and more consistent. We need to return to the days where small businesses are treated with the respect they deserve. That's what a coalition government will do.”
“If you look at the Sunshine Coast, the sector which has the highest number of registered businesses is the construction sector. In other words, our biggest sector with the most businesses is the very sector most impacted by Labor government policy and the rate of insolvencies. ASIC say that the second most impacted sector is accommodation, food and hospitality. Again, that's a major sector on the Sunshine Coast, which is why so many of our residents, amidst a cost-of-living crisis, are doing it especially tough, because they either own a small business or they work for a small business. Those who aren't closing their doors are struggling enormously. They're on their knees trying to make ends meet. For the coalition's part, this is why we have been unashamedly pro small business, ensuring we have plans to help small business.”
“I am deeply concerned about small businesses across the Sunshine Coast. Many of them are struggling enormously. Unless you yourself are directly involved in a small business, you often don't know how hard they're doing it. We see 'for lease' signs right across the region, but these empty shops are only really the tip of the iceberg. We know that right across Australia, under this Labor government, 27,000 businesses have gone under. That's 27,000 businesses that have gone insolvent. The Sunshine Coast is not immune to that. In fact, we've been directly in the firing line. According to ASIC data, the sector of the economy that has been most impacted is the construction sector, constituting about 27 per cent of all insolvencies.”
“My question goes to the Prime Minister. The Albanese Labor government has created a cost-of-living crisis, a gas crisis, a crime crisis, a rent crisis, an energy crisis and a housing crisis. The Prime Minister promised on nearly 100 occasions that he would cut power bills by $275 a year. With families now paying up to $1,000 more than Labor promised, can the Prime Minister point to a single Australian paying less for energy now than they were three years ago?”
“At the very least, they also needed to get to the games very early in the morning to watch the marathon. Of course, despite the fact we carved out money for the rail, both the Albanese government and the Palaszczuk-Miles government stalled the project for three years, amidst a hyperinflationary environment, so of course the price tag has gone up. The former Labor state government suggested it could be as high as $12 billion. We need to unite as a region and continue to advocate for that rail line as part of an integrated system with a mass transit solution.”
“And so, as the state government now reviews what should happen with managing the games after really going in the slow lane under the former Palaszczuk-Miles government, I am unashamedly still out there, putting forward the very case I put forward when we put our bid on the table for the Olympic and Paralympic Games in the first place—basketball preliminaries at Maroochydore. Why? Because our region deserves a multipurpose convention centre. Secondly, it's rail. The basic thinking about having an Olympic sport at Maroochydore was a provided rationale for bringing rail off the existing line along the coastal strip all the way up to Maroochydore to ensure that, as people attended the games from around the world, they could get to those preliminaries.”
“That is why the basketball preliminaries were so important to the Sunshine Coast when we secured the games. Now there are two options: either you hold the basketball preliminaries at Kawana, or you hold them in Maroochydore. I recognise that the former council of the Sunshine Coast wanted them to be held at Kawana. I disagreed with them then, and I still disagree now with those who insist that it should be held at Kawana. There are good reasons why we need to ensure that we don't just have all basketball courts consolidated at Kawana, but the real reason I want it at Maroochydore is because, by hosting the basketball preliminaries at Maroochydore, we have the opportunity to leverage public funding together with private capital to build that multipurpose convention centre as a lasting legacy for generations to come.”
“There are two particular projects I want to point to: (1) I believe the single greatest game-changing infrastructure we can have on the Sunshine Coast is heavy passenger rail running along the CAMCOS corridor along the coastal strip; and (2) I believe it's high time the Sunshine Coast had a multipurpose convention centre. Both of these things are not new ideas for the Sunshine Coast, but what we've been lacking up until only a few years ago was the catalyst to bring these projects on to accelerate the delivery of projects we need for our future. Therein lay the key to the 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games. It allowed us to secure funding that otherwise would not be available. A multipurpose convention centre should be based on the grounds of the new CBD in Maroochydore.”
“The IOC embraced that. Under their 'new norms', as they call it, their vision for future Olympic and Paralympic Games is not that the host region change its area so that it can fit the Games but rather that the Games change what it does to fit the future vision of that area; in other words, a vision where the local community is empowered to leverage the Games to create the future they envisage for their own residents, for their own nation. It's with that spirit that we decided to bid for the 2032 Games, and we won that bid. This takes me to the importance of ensuring the Sunshine Coast wins regarding infrastructure for our future as we prepare for the Games.”
“I remember very well that, in the former government, I played that role as the Prime Minister's representative and leader of the negotiations on behalf of the federal government to secure that 2032 bid. I remember being very proud of those sports that we were able to carve out for the Sunshine Coast. So much as I'm a sports fanatic, as much as any person is in Australia—we Australians love our sport—we can't lose sight of why we went after the Games in the first place. It wasn't to host the Games per se. It wasn't about our love of sport. In truth, we went after the opportunity to host the 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games because it provided South-East Queensland with an opportunity to unlock capital to build infrastructure for our future. That wasn't a secret plan. In fact, we were very upfront with the Olympic movement at the time.”
“Indeed, between getting elected in 2016 and the end of the coalition government in 2022, I can't find a region in Australia that received as much federal government funding for infrastructure as we did on the Sunshine Coast. This is all about ensuring we work as a team and go after what the Sunshine Coast needs most. This leads me to talk about the 2032 Olympic and Paralympic Games. This will certainly be one of the greatest events Australia has ever hosted. Indeed, it will be the greatest of all time. When it comes to the Sunshine Coast's role in the 2032 Games, there are a string of sports that we will be hosting on the coast, including the marathon, road cycling, mountain biking, kiteboarding and the football and basketball preliminaries, as well as the marathon and road cycling for the Paralympics.”
“It also explains why we were successful in ensuring that we had money put aside for rail through to the coastal strip. For the first time ever, we now have rail funding allocated, with the rail going on to the coastal strip of our region. We have $2.75 billion now allocated from the federal government towards that $5.5 billion total envelope of funding when you add the state government's contribution. It's a reminder, too, of what it means to be a federal MP, to be given the honour to serve your local community. Down here in parliament, there's always a lot of talk, chatter, and words that are said. Ultimately, we are judged by our performance and what we do. I'm proud to say that working as a team with my colleagues on the Sunshine Coast, we have gotten stuff done.”
“It also explains why I've been working so closely with my colleagues—in particular Llew O'Brien to my north and Andrew Wallace to my south—to ensure that, as a team, we go in to bat for our broader region to make sure that we unlock the capital required to ensure infrastructure keeps up with that population growth. It is why we have successfully achieved an outcome of $3.2 billion for upgrades to the Bruce Highway. It is how we were able to unlock a $181 million concessional loan to ensure the Sunshine Coast Airport could be turned into an international airport. It also explains why we were able to achieve a $390 million contribution from the former coalition government for an upgrade to the rail line, the B2N line, with upgrades through to Nambour.”
“The Sunshine Coast is one of the fastest-growing regions in Australia. Data suggests we're growing by about 8,000 new residents every single year. The population of the Sunshine Coast at the moment is about 350,000 people. By 2041, it will have reached half a million people. We can look at these statistics and we can take pride in the fact that we are a lifestyle capital. We can take pride in the fact we are such an attractive region that other people want to come and join us. However, we have to also recognise that there are growing pains here. When a region grows at such a pace, it is absolutely critical that we have infrastructure being built ahead of the population curve, and this is a massive challenge on the Sunshine Coast.”
“What we don't want to hear in this next election campaign is Labor MPs blaming their weak Prime Minister or blaming the zealot ideologue of the minister. Each and every one of you told an untruth to your residents about $275 cuts. Own up to it.”
“Labor must be judged not by its promises but by its performance. Three years ago, each Labor member in this chamber was out in his or her electorate spruiking promises to change the world. But fast-forward, here we are, the final whistle almost blown on this term of government, and the scoreboard tells a very different story than the promises they made. Every single Labor MP in this chamber promised their constituents a $275 reduction in household power bills, but households are now paying up to $1,000 more than Labor promised. Labor promised a more reliable electricity grid, yet constituents are now anxious about blackouts. Labor promised emissions would go down, yet emissions have gone up. Labor promised that investment would come in; instead sovereign risk has gone up. The scoreboard is an utter disgrace.”
“It is time that Australia had a pragmatic energy approach and put engineering and economics at the centre. We need a balanced energy mix. That balanced energy mix includes renewables and gas. We shouldn't be closing our coal plants prematurely, but, once they do retire from the grid, they should be replaced with another form of 24/7, always on, base-load power in the form of zero-emission nuclear energy. To the extent that this government continues, it needs to have scrutiny. It needs to answer questions. At the very least when it comes to this week, in this parliament, scrutiny should be applied to the Electricity Infrastructure Legislation Amendment Bill 2025. To do otherwise would be a disgrace, but that is the Albanese government. Debate adjourned.”
“That is why as an opposition we make clear: (1) this bill should not be sent to Federation Chamber for debate; it should be debated here in this chamber; (2) this bill should be referred to a Senate committee, the committee for environment and communications legislation, for review so proper scrutiny of the bill can take place; and (3) given the lack of scrutiny and the long, sorry saga which has led to this point, the coalition will oppose this bill in the House. I close with these last comments. Australia right now is amidst an energy crisis. We have a government which is hell-bent on putting all eggs in one basket with a renewables-only approach. This is making Australians poorer. Businesses are closing. Our economy will be weaker. We are eroding our energy security. It is only getting worse.”
“But Labor refuse to agree that a balanced energy mix will work even though their approach leaves Australia isolated. There is not one country in the world seeking to do what Labor is attempting. Even though prices go up, lights go out and emissions, by the way, don't even come down, this government wants to double down. That is why it all comes back to the importance of scrutiny. The bill before the House, the Electricity Infrastructure Legislation Amendment Bill 2025, needs scrutiny.”
“To think that Australia is the only nation amongst the G20 which is either not using nuclear energy or not moving towards it—it's ridiculous. So every other advanced economy in the world is using nuclear energy today or moving towards it, yet the Albanese government wants nuclear energy to remain illegal in Australia. The coalition have been very clear with our approach, and it is one of a balanced energy mix. We believe that only a balanced energy mix will deliver cheap, clean and consistent 24/7 electricity. That means renewables, gas and, as coal retires from the system, zero-emission nuclear energy. We have accepted a scenario of increased demand for electricity by up to around 60 per cent between now and 2050 as the more realistic plan put forward by the market operator.”
“The problem is investment has stalled on wind and solar under the Albanese government. This is what happens when you intervene so much in the marketplace and heighten sovereign risk. It impacts every sector. And if they're so hell-bent on closing down one system to replace it entirely with renewables, why then make this intervention on offshore wind and send all the wrong signals to the private sector? It doesn't make sense unless you are just mopping up at mistake, which is precisely what this is. The Albanese government only wants all eggs in one basket—renewables only. Not only is it trying to suffocate gas and close coal prematurely, not only is it stalling the rollout of renewables, but it is also denying Australia the opportunity to look at alternate technologies used the world over, including zero emissions nuclear energy.”
“That's how much they're trying to suffocate gas. The approvals process is an absolute debacle. They have not advanced one critical gas infrastructure project. They stripped any money out for CCS. This is a government which is adamantly opposed to Australia using its own gas, and of course that has impacts on our trading partners. When you have the Japanese, of all people, publicly calling out the sovereign risk of Australia due to the market interventions of the minister for climate change in the Albanese government, you know there's a problem. And there is a problem, because they are jeopardising not just our energy security but the energy security of our key allies and trading partners. So they're killing off coal prematurely; they're suffocating gas. Why? Because they want to put all eggs in one basket of wind and solar.”
“It is a direct consequence of a constraint placed on the market operator for its system plan by this minister and this Albanese government—a direct intervention for which they do not want scrutiny. They're saying that they now appreciate that gas might be important. Again, this government has intervened in the gas marketplace, sought not to be under scrutiny and made things worse. This government is suffocating the supply of gas in Australia. We have abundant gas under our feet in Australia. This government is suffocating its supply to the Australian marketplace. It's often gas which sets the price of electricity, and once you limit supply, supply and demand, prices go up. That's what has been happening. The Albanese government uses taxpayer money to fund legal activists to fight gas projects in the courts.”
“It is as a direct consequence of the minister's declaration of an 82 per cent renewables grid by 2030 and the nearly 100 per cent thereafter that the market operator has been forced to plan premature closure of coal plants. Every now and then, when it looks like we're going to have a blackout, people fret because we're running out of energy, and yet the form of 24/7 always-on baseload power that keeps the lights on is being pushed out of the marketplace prematurely due to this minister's instruction. Over the next 10 years we will have over 12 gigawatts of energy generation coming from coal plants closed ahead of when these coal plant owners have them scheduled to close. So Labor's bringing forward the closure of our baseload power stations, despite the fact this is leading to an increase in prices and heightened risk of blackouts.”
“Well, this is controversial, and the coalition disagreed with the government's judgement but still that's what they want to do. Why? Consistent with everything done by this minister on offshore wind, this change will be done without scrutiny, because it just mops up yet another failure. I have to say one of the issues here goes beyond offshore wind. This, again, is a consistent approach we have seen from this minister and from this government right throughout this term where the minister has intervened in the marketplace and, in so doing, has made things worse. Just as the minister has shown reckless indifference to regional communities with respect to offshore wind, so too has he shown disregard for every Australian when it comes to planning premature closure of baseload power stations.”
“Today we're talking about a bill, even though a Senate committee is still yet to investigate those exact same changes to the regulations made by the minister in December. In other words, those changes are yet to undergo scrutiny, and so, in the absence of that scrutiny, the minister has come into this chamber and wants to legislate the exact same thing plus retrospectivity. And what makes this even worse is that this morning the Albanese government has tried to gag debate in this chamber because it does not want scrutiny or transparency, instead it wants to shove this debate off to the secondary chamber, the Federation Chamber. It does so against the Practice , where usually the government and opposition agree that bills which are not controversial get sent to that secondary chamber.”
“The problem he really wants to fix is all those people who had put in applications who either had been rejected or he had planned to reject previously. In other words, he wants the change he made to the regulations last December to apply retrospectively, not just in the future but in the past. To make a retrospective change is a big deal in any area, but it's particularly a big deal when you are dealing with a private sector which has already submitted applications on certain rules of the game by that same government. But that's this minister's plan. I don't deny there may indeed be merit to considering such things, but, in the context of the ongoing lack of scrutiny and the reckless indifference to regional communities and the private sector from this minister, that risk cannot be taken.”
“Instead of dealing with this front-on, coming clean and saying, 'Okay, we've got an issue here. I could have done this better. This is how we now need to work together,' instead of engaging with this chamber and instead of engaging with industry, the minister decided, without telling the outside world, much less people in this parliament, to change the regulations so that that problem would just go away. When did he do this? Just before Christmas, after parliament rose last year—again avoiding any scrutiny. On 12 December the minister changed the regulations to mop up the mess he had created on how feasibility licences are granted. But then he found out those changes he made to the regulations—again, with haste, without scrutiny and without doing his homework—wouldn't do the job.”
“The minister has just rejected that application with lower merit, with no consideration of still granting a licence for another place within that zone. The original regulations should have accounted for that possibility, but they didn't. Why? Because this minister, again, with great haste, just put in the regulations, but he ended up being found out. He was taken to court. The court found that, in that example, the minister actually did have the power to still grant the second applicant a feasibility license, but the minister never did that. The minister's decision was basically that, once you're rejected, you're out of the race. The courts said he wasn't able to do that. In fact, he should have considered using a power that was there to still grant a licence.”