Page 2605 - Week 07 - Thursday, 2 August 2018
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
2020, a little under two years from now. We are taking steps today that will see the territory achieve zero net emissions by 2045. As a jurisdiction, we have supported the rollout of more solar panels and batteries to individual homes than any other jurisdiction in the country. We have driven the establishment of new major wind and solar facilities, along with the creation of thousands of new private sector jobs in the process.
We are delivering clean, reliable and affordable energy in a way that recognises and responds to the huge shifts underway in the sector and in our wider economy. This has been a priority for the government throughout our time in office. So we come to the debate about the national energy guarantee with not only a significant investment in getting our national policy settings right but also a long and consistent track record of getting things done.
Our community needs a reasonable, durable framework that can deliver clean, reliable and affordable energy for households and businesses. That is our focus, and that should be standard against which new policies are assessed.
The Turnbull government’s national energy guarantee proposal calls to mind the line, which many people’s dads have probably used at least once, that if you wanted to get there you would not start from here. We should be under no illusion about the internal Liberal/National party contortions and compromises of principle that have led to the NEG’s development. We should not rush past the fact that real damage has been done to the security and reliability of our nation’s electricity networks and to the new jobs and investment pipeline because this policy debate has gone on far longer than it should have.
Nevertheless, here we are. We believe that the states and territories have a responsibility to work constructively with the commonwealth parliament to get the best possible outcome on energy and climate policy. We need to improve the proposal that is now in front of us, or it will not achieve its promise of reducing prices and emissions and improving reliability of supply. Expert advice suggests that it could end up having a negative impact in all of the areas that it promises to improve. In that context, there is a series of amendments and adjustments we believe must be made to the national energy guarantee to deal with the serious shortcomings that have been outlined.
The NEG has two components. The first is a series of commonwealth policies intended for eventual introduction to the commonwealth parliament which deal with issues such as the emissions reduction target and its trajectory. The second is the Energy Security Board’s framework, which will amend the national electricity laws to establish reliability and emissions reduction obligations on electricity retailers. We believe that both components of the scheme need to be improved in key ways.
On the emissions reduction side, there is a strong view from experts and climate scientists that a 26 per cent emissions reduction target is simply too low and that, if the commonwealth is in any way serious about limiting the impacts of harmful climate change on our economy, our environment and our community, it needs to raise the ambition of this target right now. So as an absolute minimum we want to see
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video