Wednesday, 16 August 2023

Bills

Energy Legislation Amendment Bill 2023

Second reading

Debate resumed.

Jade BENHAM (Mildura) (18:01): Just let me recap on what I was saying before we went to the matter of public importance about the Energy Legislation Amendment Bill 2023. It is a very appropriate week to be talking about this, given the amount of people here that were raising the issue of energy, and energy transmission in fact, yesterday in Spring Street. There were 45 tractors brought in on 22 trucks to illustrate that they think their livelihoods should be protected, that their opinions matter, and they do, and that the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO), who is rolling out the Victoria to NSW Interconnector West (VNI West) project, have failed miserably in their community consultation in the first instance of this. We had some people tell us yesterday that the first that they had heard about this project, or the change of route, I should say, was through the media and in the paper, which is not always appropriate.

Then there were some people doing some community consultation at supermarkets. There was in fact an energy engineer, an electricity engineer, taking part in these surveys – the tick the box for community consultation – and even he was bamboozled by the survey that was taking place and the incredible technicalities of it. Mum walking into the supermarket with three kids to try and do her nightly groceries – I do not know, I certainly could not stand there with my kids and do a technical survey; to call it a community consultation is not very effective.

This bill amends the National Electricity (Victoria) Act 2005 to strengthen the retailer reliability obligation framework that was established under the national electricity law and recently amended to enable the jurisdiction and its energy ministers to trigger the RRO. The decision to trigger that will be made in consultation with AEMO, with the energy regulator, the Treasurer and the Premier.

I hate the word ‘triggered’, but AEMO is a bit of a triggering word for those in western Victoria at the moment. I will say it again: we are not against renewables. In fact with the investment that it has brought to my patch we are not against them at all. In fact great, bring it on. There are a few questions around the end of life for the solar panels that have gone in, and we have got hundreds of acres that have been put into solar panels. The other thing that bamboozles me about that is: it is okay to build solar panels on what planning departments and planning schemes deem ‘valuable agricultural land’. I know it is a solar ‘farm’ but again, with differential council rates they are very different to irrigated horticultural dry land. Then there is the afterlife of those solar farms. What is the plan for that? What is the plan for the land as well? Can we then build on it? You can put a solar farm there, but you cannot put a dozen houses to help with the housing crisis. Some of this stuff just does not make sense, but what does make sense is the plan B for the VNI West project. Plan A – sorry, no, it is not plan A, it is plan 5A, or option 5A, which is actually about the eighth or ninth option that has come out. It has come out with 1A; 2A, B and C; and 3A, B and C and so on and so forth. But plan B is the one that we want consultation on.

I was talking earlier about AEMO’s modelling of VNI West, and it shows that wind farms in western Victoria – these are important facts and figures – will lose about 40 per cent of their energy production. Solar farms – and there are a lot of them – are much the same, because they do produce a lot of energy. But what good is that energy if you cannot store it or you cannot transmit it to where it is needed? You could do that, but what is the point of losing 40 per cent of that in the plan that has been proposed? Plan B can actually do that with far less curtailment and far less points of failure, and that is what we need, because some people will ask questions about the reliability of sun and wind. If you have less points of failure in the transmission, then maybe we can keep the lights on. Also for manufacturing and for industry up our way – the manufacturing industry is continuing to boom along with the agriculture sector – these things will be put at risk if we have not got reliable energy. Plan B also costs $5 billion less, according to page 15. Go and read the report, I encourage you. It is on the Victorian Energy Policy Centre’s website. It is 92 pages long; it is a thrilling read. Go and read it, and you will see the table that I am talking about. It estimates that it could save energy customers $1 billion.

Nina TAYLOR (Albert Park) (18:07): I am going to speak to the bill that we have in front of us here today. There are a number of technical amendments within the context of ensuring energy reliability into the future. I should say I am going to explain a further subset of that, and that is the bigger picture and the primary mechanism to ensure we have new renewable capacity to come online in time for the closure of the coal-fired generators, because we are going through a huge energy transformation. That is so, so important. Of course that requires a significant amount of legislation. Honestly, this has been going on for years, because these things do not just happen overnight. You cannot just pop up a little social media post and say, ‘Transforming the energy market’ and ‘Reduce the emissions’ without actually doing it. This provides another important mechanism to ensure that we have controls in place that facilitate that very important supply as we are transforming the energy market into the future.

What is actually driving this change? We do have nation-leading emission reduction targets of 75 to 80 per cent by 2035, and I am so excited about this. The good thing is that our government is actually putting the mechanisms – and has been for some time – in place to make this happen. Of course we know how complex the energy market is as well, but nevertheless that has not in any way inhibited progressing in this space in spite of some pretty tough fossil fuel lobbies and otherwise. Some of the elements that have helped in terms of providing the primary measures that actually ensure reliable energy include strong renewable energy targets and programs, such as our Victorian renewable energy target auctions. We have had two of them – the two major Victorian renewable energy target auctions – and these really have given that very positive signal to market. But not only the signal, they are actually driving outcomes in terms of investment in renewable energy. We have our $1.3 billion Solar Homes program and the $540 million Renewable Energy Zone Fund.

Just to come back to the bill in terms of what the retailer reliability obligation is, it is a smaller measure when it comes to the reliability of energy supply but nevertheless an important one. Smaller measures that ensure the right rules are in place to improve reliability are also important, I should say, and one such measure is the retailer reliability obligation, or RRO. The RRO works by ensuring that electricity retailers and large energy users have enough capacity contracted to meet forecast demand. That is an inherent element of this bill. It is really about giving Victorians confidence that energy markets are working in their favour.

I want to come back to the primary measures that ensure reliability of energy supply into the future, noting that the RRO is a just-in-case measure that will only be used when the market does not automatically respond to a forecast reliability gap. I want to come to the major triggers in terms of keeping that steady energy supply. What is really driving that are our ambitious renewable energy targets. They are the foundation of that agenda, setting a clear direction for investors to follow. It is just so very exciting. Well, I get excited about it anyway. I think everyone here is excited too – I am feeling it – particularly the Minister for Climate Action; she loves this. You can feel it every time she gets up and speaks in the chamber.

But anyway, getting down to the specifics, our first Victorian renewable energy target auction – get this – was the largest of its type in Australia when it launched and supported five projects totalling 800 megawatts of new capacity. This is exactly what we need when we are talking about reliability of energy supply into the future. Our second auction, the VRET 2, will bring forward – get this – 623 megawatts of renewable energy and deliver up to 365 megawatts of new battery energy storage.

Daniela De Martino: Hear, hear!

Nina TAYLOR: Yes, it is great, isn’t it? Sorry, I just paused there. I was just reflecting. I am thinking how great this is. But anyway, coming back to the bill. I did refer to this earlier but I am going into greater depth because I think it is important community understands exactly what we are doing.

The $1.3 billion Solar Homes program is delivering renewables at the household level, and we have already helped over 200,000 households access rooftop solar. That is putting power back in the hands of Victorians. Not only are they saving money, they are having a bit of a say in their energy production or storage. This year rooftop solar has generated – this is the good stuff – nearly five times the power generated by gas in Victoria. That number will only grow as the 10-year Solar Homes program continues to roll out, and we know it is important as part of the gas substitution road map. If we are going to get to those aggressive emissions reduction targets – which we need to because we need a future for Victorians, and who does not want a cleaner energy future, I think we all do, noting also the obvious translation to benefits in terms of putting downward pressure on power prices – this is exactly the way to do it.

We have also invested $540 million from the Victorian Renewable Energy Zone fund to upgrade our grid and unlock new capacity. As a result of policies such as this Victoria has more than tripled renewable energy generation since 2014. I think it is important to emphasise these elements – they are very factual elements – because I know with young people today sometimes with all the data and investment et cetera it is hard to get that cut-through so they actually know what is happening. I think is important they do so they can have confidence not only in energy supply for the future but in the Victorian government and that we are absolutely committed to providing a viable future for them, because we know that climate change is absolutely upon us. We have seen dreadful fires and an overheating, for want of a better word, summer in Europe, and we saw those fires in Hawaii recently, which is very disturbing, but it is all the more impetus to back in the changes that we are implementing in this state.

As the share of renewables increases, there are also new opportunities – and this is also really important, because obviously you cannot just generate the energy, you need somewhere to store it – for energy storage solutions. That is why our renewable energy targets are supported by Australia’s biggest energy storage targets, with at least 2.6 gigawatts of energy storage capacity in Victoria by 2030 and 6.3 gigawatts by 2035.

Interestingly, there are three broad categories of battery technology that are currently a focus for investment in Victoria, and our state is a leader in all of them. Just think about that. Victorians are fantastic. You know, I cannot say it enough. I am speaking for our Victorian community as a whole. I am not talking myself up, I am talking about our community.

Daniela De Martino: Hear, hear!

Nina TAYLOR: Exactly. We are Australia’s home of large utility-scale batteries, including the 300-megawatt Victorian Big Battery, the largest lithium ion battery in the Southern Hemisphere. I know that even when I have discussions with people in my local community and I reference some of these elements, they cannot believe it, because respectfully, sometimes we have some opponents who try to blur the line and say, ‘They’re not doing anything, they’re not cutting anything’. But actually when you cut through that and spell out what we are doing, they are like, ‘Really, you’re doing that?’ Again, it is not to compliment our government or myself in that regard. It is about transparency so that people know what is being invested and what it means for them, because if we do not tell them, how are they going to know? Unless they live near one of these batteries, of course, and that would be a different circumstance.

Some of the big batteries that we have in the pipeline are, in the 44 seconds I have: a 125-megawatt big battery with grid-forming inverters, which will be funded by $119 million from our Renewable Energy Zone Fund; another 100-megawatt battery with grid-forming inverters in Terang, supported through our Energy Innovation Fund; and four batteries – I have still got time – totalling 365 megawatts as part of projects that were successful in the Victorian renewable energy target auction. There it is again – see what that is doing to drive the market? This is really inspiring investors, and not just inspiring them but getting them into it. It is fantastic. And there is also a growing number of big batteries being developed and operated by private sector market participants, including the 150-megawatt Hazelwood battery energy storage system, which opened in June. And there is so much more.

Wayne FARNHAM (Narracan) (18:17): It is always a pleasure to listen to the member for Albert Park. I am sorry, my contribution will be a lot more benign than the member’s, but it is always enjoyable listening to her.

Members interjecting.

Wayne FARNHAM: The fellow that looks like the kid off Hey Dad..! over there just needs to calm down. You are not even sledging me from your seat. I am happy to rise today to talk on the Energy Legislation Amendment Bill 2023. This bill is part of the government’s commitment to managing the transition of the energy sector to achieve net zero emissions by 2045 while ensuring the reliability of supply of energy to Victorian consumers. Its purposes are to amend the National Electricity (Victoria) Act 2005 to incorporate decision-making requirements that will apply to the minister when deciding whether to make a T-3 reliability instrument under the National Electricity (Victoria) Law, to amend the National Gas (Victoria) Act 2008 to enable regulations to be made that prescribe a civil penalty for a breach of a declared system provision that is prescribed to be a civil penalty provision, to make further modifications to the National Gas (Victoria) Law as it applies as a law of Victoria to enable the Supreme Court to make an order that a person pay a civil penalty for a breach of a declared system provision that is prescribed to be a civil penalty provision and to update references to the Essential Services Commission’s gas distribution system code in part 6 of that act. I will note that this side of the house does not oppose this bill, as the member for Croydon pointed out this morning – the taller, good-looking bald guy that looks like me. His contribution was very, very concise.

When we talk about energy, when we talk about supply and when we talk about reliability, this bill is a good bill. It gives the minister the power to direct energy companies to fix problems. Earlier it was pointed out that we quite often have planned and unplanned outages, and this gives the minister that power, especially for unplanned outages. They are the ones that really affect people. We all know when the storms went through Monbulk a few years ago – I think they were in 2020 – trees took down powerlines and people were really affected. I think a bill that gives the minister the power to direct power companies to fix those problems quickly and efficiently is probably a good thing, and that is why we support it on this side of the chamber.

When we talk about gas and gas supply, it is interesting that the government has quite recently said that gas will not be in any new house that needs a planning permit from 2024. I think the government has possibly jumped the gun a little bit on gas supply. The thing about gas at the moment is we still need it. I have spoken about this before. The foundations are not quite there yet for renewable. Everybody agrees that renewable is good and everyone wants a clean environment, but we also want cheaper prices, and at the moment no-one’s power prices are going down. I think for the government to take gas out of the supply chain at the moment is premature. The government could allow gas to continue while we are transitioning – remember, we have not shut Yallourn yet; Yallourn is due to shut in 2028 – until we know renewable will work. I really hope it does, because it is going to cost Victorians I do not know how many billion dollars to do renewable. So I hope the investment is a wise investment. But until we get that right, until we know that that power generation is reliable, do not take another energy source out of the system. What the government maybe should consider is keeping gas on board.

I am a little bit confused about their announcement that no new home that requires a planning permit will have gas after 2024. I probably want the government to know this, because I do not think they have got it right: new homes do not need a planning permit, new homes require a building permit. They are two completely different things. Most homes that require a planning permit will have a heritage overlay or will be a heritage listed house, or it could be a renovation that is very close to a neighbour’s house. Those things require planning permits. New homes only require a building permit.

Is the government actually saying with the gas legislation that every new subdivision in 2024 that goes in for planning will not be connected to gas? At the moment the government is having a very different conversation, and what it needs to do is clarify this. You have developers out there that are very confused at the moment. The developers are going, ‘Can we or can’t we run gas?’ So the government really has to get its language right on this; it is very important. But I think the government should allow gas in the subdivisions, because as hydrogen technology advances and gets better, we can put hydrogen through the gas lines. So my advice to the government is: get the renewable sector right first. Keep gas there as an energy source. Do not take it all away at once, because my fear is it will fail.

We do not know yet whether, when Yallourn turns off in 2028, all the effort put into this is actually going to power the state. And not long after 2028 we will have Loy Yang shut down, and that is more pressure on the system, so the government has got to be very careful where it treads. The government has to really, really think about this carefully, because if they get it wrong, it will affect all Victorians. It will not be seat by seat, it will be the whole of Victoria. So I would encourage the government to keep gas in the system. When hydrogen comes online and is an efficient source – and I believe it is actually not that far away – hydrogen can use the gas infrastructure, and that would be smarter.

I think the government really needs to be clear with consumers on gas. I had some constituents in my office the other day – and I do not know if this is correct or incorrect; I have to do the research – who read somewhere that if your gas appliance is nine years old, you will not be able to get that serviced. If that is the case, there are a lot of gas appliances over nine years old and there are a lot of people that cannot afford that transition from gas to electric. As I have stated previously, an average house would cost about $30,000, and that is going to affect a lot of the older people in our community that do not have that income stream. They could be pensioners or reliant on retirement income. So the government has got to be really clear on this, because Victorians are worried and they have a right to be worried. I would like the government to go back and actually be very, very specific in what they are putting forward, but I would discourage the government at this point in time to stop gas. It is not a wise decision. Get your foundation right, then stop gas and then go forward with that.

Gary MAAS (Narre Warren South) (18:27): Acting Speaker Crugnale, it is so terrific to see you in the chair. Thank you for the opportunity to make a contribution to the Energy Legislation Amendment Bill 2023. To kick it off, I just want to ask a rhetorical question: how hardworking is the Minister for Energy and Resources and Minister for Climate Action? How hardworking is she? Every time we come to this chamber, there is a bill to do with energy or there is a bill to do with climate change. She is making sure that this state, when it comes to renewable energy –

Members interjecting.

Gary MAAS: Do not get me started on renewable energy and your lot. You never vote for anything that has to do with renewable energy. You always vote it down. When it comes to ensuring energy safety, when it comes to ensuring renewable energy and when it comes to ensuring that the climate change deniers are put back in their place, we have a climate change and energy minister in this state that the whole of Victoria can rely upon. And when it comes to this bill, we are trying –

Members interjecting.

Gary MAAS: Well, if you want me to take you through the energy bills that the Liberal Party has voted down in this place, I am very, very happy to take you through them. At every single stage the Liberal Party have opposed any bills that relate to energy targets or climate action, so let us go through them.

Richard Riordan interjected.

Gary MAAS: The member for Polwarth can keep going on and on and on –

Bridget Vallence: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, I believe we are addressing the Energy Legislation Amendment Bill 2023. It is a specific bill. It has been circulated. And on relevance, I would ask you to bring the member back to the narrow bill and the member not to take it as an opportunity to attack the opposition.

Paul Edbrooke: On the point of order, Acting Speaker –

Wayne Farnham: Sorry, Acting Speaker, the member is actually not in his seat, so he can’t raise a point of order.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Jordan Crugnale): No, that is right. Member for Frankston, you are not in your seat. I ask the member for Narre Warren South to continue and get back to the legislation.

Gary MAAS: Okay. All right, given I have been pointed back to the legislation after a couple of minutes, I might just go to the fact that the bill does actually have three very important components, which are all around supply as well as regulation. The first adds decision-making criteria to the legislation in the event that the minister for energy triggers the retail reliability obligation (RRO), the second enables alignment between penalties applied to Victorian gas market participants with those in other jurisdictions and the third changes outdated references to our gas distribution system code, which is now known as the Gas Distribution System Code of Practice.

I would like to go to the issue of supply primarily in this bill, and we know that since privatisation the energy market has not always delivered for Victorian households and businesses. Basic supply-and-demand economics: short supply drives up prices, so there is not always that incentive there for market operators to supply. We know that electricity is one type of product that just simply cannot run out for Victorians. The energy crisis that has seen power prices rise over the past 12 months is an example of this. Several breakdowns at coal-fired generators across the east coast, coupled with the war in Ukraine, saw shortfalls that drove prices higher. Those prices are now flowing through to retail bills. Renewables were the lone hero throughout this crisis. Wholesale power prices in Victoria have consistently been the lowest in the national electricity market due to our investments in renewable energy over the past eight years. In fact across the NEM there is a very strong correlation between higher shares of renewable energy and lower wholesale prices. Victoria is still exposed to unreliable coal-fired generation and high fossil fuel prices, but Victorians have been better insulated than the northern states, which are more dependent on coal and gas. The RRO is in place to incentivise additional capacity over the medium term by ensuring that supply will match demand. It also holds retailers and large energy users to account. It will work with longer-term measures to support new capacity and shorter-term measures that the Australian Energy Market Operator can utilise in the event of coal outages on peak demand days.

There is also the introduction here of regulations so that civil penalties can be put in place for gas wholesale markets, and so as I said, the bill enables regulations to be made to increase the maximum civil penalties payable by gas companies that do the wrong thing. The change will allow the Australian Energy Regulator to apply penalties consistently across all jurisdictions across the east coast gas market, and the amendment reflects a couple of things. Firstly, it continues our government’s tough approach to energy companies that simply do the wrong thing, and we do note that under the previous Liberal government big energy companies were allowed to run quite rampant. In just four years, power prices increased by nearly 35 per cent, and gas and electricity disconnections more than doubled.

Richard Riordan interjected.

Gary MAAS: The truth hurts, I get it. But it left really, really vulnerable Victorians without access to electricity and heating. Through our energy fairness plan we have tipped the scales in favour of households. We have halved the number of disconnections. We have made the energy market easier to understand. We have provided four rounds of the power saving bonus and increased penalties for big companies that do the wrong thing. Secondly, it demonstrates the greater cooperation between the Commonwealth and state government on energy matters. Quite frankly, you might remember a period of time when we had someone who was to become Prime Minister of this country with a lump of coal in the chamber.

A member: Oh, shame.

Gary MAAS: Yes, indeed. But now after nine years of denial and delay under the –

Richard Riordan interjected.

Gary MAAS: Jeez, the truth really hurts, doesn’t it? The truth really hurts. After nine years of denial and delay under the previous coalition government, we have a federal government that we can work with to get things done. This will be to the benefit of not only Victorians but all Australians as we cooperate to advance the energy transition and apply consistent rules across the country to protect energy users.

The amendments are technical in nature, and I am very pleased to hear that the Liberal opposition is in fact supporting the bill. As I pointed out, this is the first energy bill of its type that we have seen the opposition support in quite some time. I was just about to run through the list of bills since 2014 that the Liberals have voted against or tried to gut in Parliament. I would like to note for the record that since that time we have had: the Climate Change Bill 2016, the Renewable Energy (Jobs and Investment) Bill 2017, the Renewable Energy (Jobs and Investment) Amendment Bill 2019, the Energy Legislation (Licence Conditions) Bill 2020 – which was voted against – and the Energy Legislation Amendment (Energy Fairness) Bill 2021. The Energy Legislation Amendment (Energy Safety) Bill 2023, which we had in this place two weeks ago, was also voted against. Time and time again, when it comes to notions of renewable energy, when it comes to notions of solar, when it comes to notions of supply and when it comes to notions of fairness for Victorians with their energy supply, the opposition will always vote it down.

This bill, as I have said, has been put together by the very hardworking minister and the department. It is an excellent bill, and I commend it to the house.

A member: Comedy show.

Richard RIORDAN (Polwarth) (18:37): Yes, it is in fact a comedy show, this paper-thin piece of legislation that has wafted into the house to clog up the government’s otherwise empty legislative agenda. This is now about the fourth paper-thin little piece of legislation. It is a do-nothing, say-nothing sort of procedural thing. An organised government that was serious about energy transition – transformation of our energy system – a government that was actually seriously worried about cost-of-living controls and seriously worried about the pressures and sustainability of energy systems would not just drip a little piece of paper like this in once a week for weeks on end. No, they would actually work –

Gary Maas: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, on relevance, for a minute now the member for Polwarth has been going on. I know it is a wideranging debate, but it would be terrific if he could return to speaking to the bill.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Jordan Crugnale): If the member for Polwarth would like to resume.

Richard RIORDAN: It is relevant, the paper thinness of this, because it speaks –

A member interjected.

Richard RIORDAN: That is right. In trying to make out what it is, I have noticed that for the government members even their talking notes can barely get them through 5 minutes or 10 minutes on this bill, because they have to go off on other tangents. But the point is that a government serious about a modern, renewable, sustainable energy system would put this procedural stuff into one decent bill, get it knocked over and get on to dealing with the issues that they have to worry about when it comes to our energy transition because –

A member interjected.

Richard RIORDAN: That is exactly right. Whether it is the disaster in public housing, where it is hard-hat city rather than hard-built form that people can live in or whether it is talking about running a Commonwealth Games and then failing to be able to deliver, or tunnels or –

The ACTING SPEAKER (Jordan Crugnale): Order! Can I please ask the member to return to debate on the bill in question.

Richard RIORDAN: Thank you, Acting Speaker. We will return to the little we can talk about with this bill, and we are talking about the fact that this government has been irresponsible in dripping this in. And we know that they are doing this because they have got so little else to talk about for the people of Victoria. There is nothing in this that is addressing cost of living. There is nothing here addressing the chronic housing crisis that we just spent 2 hours debating and heard absolutely nothing new from the government on.

What this legislation fails to do, and what the numerous energy supply and energy management pieces of legislation that have dribbled through this Parliament over recent weeks have failed to do, is actually give Victorians a clear road map on how we are going to have a sustainable and viable energy supply system into the future. This legislation seeks to blame retailers and seeks to put the obligation on retailers to make sure there is enough generation, but if the minister would only come and talk to non-sycophantic country folk, they would show her them quite clearly. I can take the energy minister for a walk, and we can have a look at whole energy projects that have been built in country Victoria that are not connected. They are sitting idle, and in fact the one closest to my electorate, Mortlake South, has sat there for two or three years barely striking a blow on the energy system. In fact more energy is consumed by a toaster than what that whole $500 million project has returned to the people of Victoria, because we have allowed huge investment into renewable energy but we have not invested in the infrastructure to transmit it.

Bridget Vallence: No transmission.

Richard RIORDAN: No transmission, and we are seeing this government completely mess up its approach to transmission. We saw half of western Victoria out on the front steps of Parliament only yesterday saying, ‘Look, Andrews Labor government, you’ve been in charge a long time. You’ve had carriage of this problem. You’ve had carriage of the solutions to transmitting energy around Victoria.’ So we can produce the renewable energy people want, but we cannot get it to the homes and the houses and the businesses that need it. This government singularly fails in the transition program that they talk about – you know, ‘zero emissions by 2030’ or whatever figure they come up with this week; we know this government very rarely has any intention of ever sticking to a public commitment it makes.

We have seen it time and time again – the Commonwealth Games; it does not matter whether it is fast rail to Geelong, airport rail links or road funding to country Victorians. In fact the minister for failed Commonwealth Games delivery was in my electorate recently, and in trying to explain to my community why she failed to deliver on the Commonwealth Games she made a promise: ‘We’re going to deliver the infrastructure that we were going to deliver to regional Victoria, but don’t expect us to give a deadline on it. We’re not giving a deadline because no-one in regional Victoria is going to see anything until at least 2026 or 27, so we’ll wait until at least then before we give any commitments.’ I thought it was yet another example of how this government loves to talk about doing something but actually delivers very little.

Once again that is what we are seeing with the transition in our energy system. We are seeing a government and all the advice it receives. It needs gas, for example, as part of the transition mechanism as a transition fuel, because we know that gas can fill in the gaps that wind and solar experience, of course, as a result of nature. They cannot do anything about it. The generators cannot make a wind turbine work when there is no wind, and they certainly cannot make solar panels functional in the middle of the night. Therefore until we get the system right, until we have enough storage and until we have the transmission line, we are going to need to have a transition fuel. This government continually demonises and puts great unnecessary strain and stress on that vital transition fuel, because while it talks it down, while it scares the market out from dealing in that, we are not going to have the investment that we need.

Juliana Addison interjected.

Richard RIORDAN: Whether you are a Labor federal government or a state government elsewhere, you have accepted – or you should have accepted – that there is a long period of transition, because despite what the backbencher member for Wendouree might think as she drives to the city and past the occasional wind farm, that alone is not going to solve the energy crisis at this point. It is a long way to go and there is much to be done, and this legislation is a poor performer in that area.

There is wording in this legislation that talks about the retailer reliability obligation. Well, it would be great if the government had a government reliability obligation built into its legislation. The government reliability obligation might say something like, say, if the government cannot get its planning right, if the government cannot get its settings right and if the government sends the wrong signals to the market. For example, in my area down in the south-west of Colac in the area called Cobden we have currently got three renewable energy companies consuming local council resources, consuming state government resources and consuming the time and anxiety of my local region over whether they are going to build solar farms or wind farms, and the reality is only one of the three will be able to fit into the grid because the grid is so substandard now.

So the problem I would ask about is: how does this legislation work to the obligation of providing renewable energy when you have got so much time and money and community angst being wasted on three projects, when they need, and there can only be, one project. That is some of the structural inefficiency and financial inefficiency that is currently being overseen by this government. It is all very well to try and push the blame of our unreliable energy system onto the private sector, but what about government’s role in providing a safe and reliable energy system? They are forcing costs up.

It was interesting that some of the government contributions were talking about how much power went up under a Liberal government. There is not a person in the state of Victoria that does not think their power bill is going up year on year on year under this current government. Even if you have put solar panels on your roof, you still expect your overall power bill to have increased in recent times, unless you have been able to supplement it with other changes to your household. With this bill, while I do not wish to overly oppose it, I just despair at the lack of cohesion in the government.

Juliana ADDISON (Wendouree) (18:47): What a delightful day for me, starting the morning with the member for Polwarth and ending the day with the member for Polwarth. I am so lucky; I just thank my lucky stars. What a day. It will come as no surprise to anyone here that I fervently disagree with that diatribe and that ranting that just was so illogical – that we are doing nothing, yet half of Victoria is protesting out the front. Mmm – doing nothing? What are they protesting about? Why are they out if we are doing nothing? It is just illogical what you present. It is ridiculous. I am actually going to talk about this bill. You do not understand it, so I am going to explain it to you – sorry, I am going to explain it to the member for Polwarth, which will be really great.

Bridget Vallence: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, I just understand previous rulings said ‘you’ is a poor reflection on the Chair, and I think the member just said ‘you’. If you could ask her not to do so. Thank you.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Jordan Crugnale): Can the member go through the Chair, please.

Juliana ADDISON: I thank the member for Evelyn for listening so carefully. I really appreciate the member for Evelyn doing that, and I will really reflect on that. Thank you.

It is very, very good to have the opportunity to rise to contribute to the debate on the Energy Legislation Amendment Bill 2023, because energy security and supply is an important issue for Victorians. It is an important issue for my electorate of Wendouree. I am really thankful for the contributions from the Labor members of this place, because they have actually read this bill and they understand why we are doing it and why it is happening.

I want to thank the Minister for Energy and Resources for bringing this legislation to this house, because this bill will further safeguard Victoria’s energy security by safeguarding our electricity supply. I thank the minister’s office for what they do, and I thank the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action for the great work that they are doing as we really transform our state’s energy, which is a really, really important thing to do.

I do support this omnibus bill, which is technical in nature, because it will strengthen the electricity and gas regulatory framework by making amendments to two pieces of legislation – those being the National Electricity (Victoria) Act 2005 and the National Gas (Victoria) Act 2008. In doing so we are enhancing protections for energy consumers and establishing more certainty for the market – important issues for communities across Victoria. Whether it is this legislation that we have brought to the house or multiple other things, including bringing back the SEC, we know that work needs to be done in this space to bring down power bills and to create thousands of jobs in renewables. That is what this government is about, and bringing back the SEC is emblematic of this government.

We are also doing other great things like providing $58.2 million to install 100 new neighbourhood batteries. I refer to what the member for Polwarth talked about. He said that we need to do other things, not just put solar panels on our roofs, to bring down electricity prices, and that is what a battery in Ballarat is going to do for my community. A neighbourhood battery is doing that something else that the member for Polwarth just referred to. That is what we are going to do: we are going to make sure that the statewide investment will triple the number of homes with access to batteries and provide crucial extra storage capacity for local communities. I welcome that, and I think that is terrific.

I also welcome what we are doing with renewables at Federation University. Our TAFE is going to receive $6 million, which was announced in the May budget, to ensure that we have the Federation TAFE Asia Pacific Renewable Energy Training Centre. This is going to be a game changer, and that is what the member for Polwarth wants. He was saying we have to do more, and that is the more we are doing. I am so pleased that I can stand up in this chamber and say that we are doing more. We are doing more with batteries, we are doing more training, we are doing more with renewables and we are bringing the SEC back, which is going to be all renewables, creating over 50,000 jobs. This is what we are doing. The member for Polwarth wants us to do more, and we are doing more.

Bridget Vallence: I cannot wait for the Matildas to be on later tonight. On a point of order, Acting Speaker, again we are talking about the Energy Legislation Amendment Bill 2023, so my point of order is on relevance. This is not the take-note motion on the budget. The member will have an opportunity to talk about the government’s budget and the SEC and other things at a later stage. This is the Energy Legislation Amendment Bill, which is a narrow bill, and I would ask you to call the member back to the bill and to be relevant to the bill.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Jordan Crugnale): I think the member is being relevant. It has been a very far-ranging debate so far, but the member is being relevant.

Juliana ADDISON: The Energy Legislation Amendment Bill 2023 enhances the regulation of both electricity and gas in Victoria, providing more certainty for markets and strengthening protections for consumers.

The amendments that are being made to the National Electricity (Victoria) Act 2005 primarily clarify what the minister must consider and do when triggering the retailer reliability obligation. The obligation is applicable when an electricity supply shortfall is forecast over three years in advance. It puts in motion an assortment of notifications and responsibilities to enable that shortfall to be covered by the market. This is what I was wanting to hear from the member for Polwarth, but I did not. I really wanted him to talk to me about his understanding of the T-3 reliability instrument. When deciding to trigger the obligation by making what is called a T-3 reliability instrument, the member for Polwarth will be very interested to know that this must happen three years out from a suspected shortfall. This bill proposes that the minister must take several things into account, including any potential impact on the liquidity of the trading markets for Victorian electrical derivatives, the availability of generating units and transmission systems at relevant times, the impact on consumers as well as any other prescribed matters. The minister may also have regard to any other matter that she considers relevant. The decision-making criteria is on top of the existing requirements under the National Electricity (Victoria) Act, such as conferring with the Australian Energy Market Operator and the Australian Energy Regulator.

In addition to this, this bill proposes that both the Premier and the Treasurer will be consulted before making a T-3 reliability instrument. When this decision is made and the official notice is published, in accordance with the National Electricity (Victoria) Act, it must also be published that same day in the Government Gazette, along with the minister’s reasoning. These are technical amendments, but they are important. They provide the criteria, the consultation and the accountability to ensure that any use of the retailer reliability obligation is justified. Having this framework means that the obligation can be triggered when it is needed, giving our state an additional insurance policy against electricity shortfalls. It is a ‘just in case’ mechanism that further improves the reliability of energy supply in our state.

Further, the bill also proposes amendments to the National Gas (Victoria) Act 2008 regarding the imposition of civil penalties for civil penalty provision breaches. Following updates to the national civil penalty framework in 2020 the Australian Energy Regulator has the flexibility in other jurisdictions to respond proportionally to breaches in line with their severity, but it only has access to lower tier 3 civil penalties here. The proposed amendments that are being put forward in this bill would put us in line with other east coast wholesale markets. This would enable the minister not just to prescribe provisions in the national gas rules that are relevant to the Victorian markets as civil penalties but also to prescribe their penalties under the National Gas Law, thereby empowering the Australian Energy Regulator to respond appropriately to instances of non-compliance.

Again, these could be considered purely technical amendments, but they shore up some very real protections for Victorians. Provisions under the national civil penalty framework can relate to important issues, which obviously was lost on the member for Polwarth, of public safety, financial harm and hardship, the fundamental right to access essential services, market distortion, supply security, system reliability, service levels, interruptions and large-scale events. I do not know about the member for Polwarth, but I care about public safety, I care about financial harm and hardship and I care about the fundamental right to access essential services, and I am very proud to be a member of a government that stands by consumers across Victoria rather than those who do not read legislation.

Annabelle CLEELAND (Euroa) (18:57): I rise today to speak on the Energy Legislation Amendment Bill 2023, a bill that we do not oppose. This bill is part of the government’s attempts to manage the transition of the energy sector to achieve net zero emissions by 2045 and to ensure that Victorian consumers have access to a reliable supply of energy. This transition period is already well and truly underway. Rapid technological change has seen changes to our national electricity market, with moves within this system being made to work towards a lower emissions electricity system. While this transition is occurring it is imperative that the reliability of our electricity supply is prioritised for the benefit of our community. Amendments in this bill will aim to deliver this. This includes amendments to both the National Electricity (Victoria) Act 2005 and the National Gas (Victoria) Act 2008, both of which have the aim of delivering better outcomes to Victorian energy consumers. The bill will amend the National Electricity (Victoria) Act 2005 to strengthen the retailer reliability obligation (RRO) framework established under the National Electricity Law – something that was recently amended itself.

This bill will also introduce decision-making criteria specific to Victoria, with consultation safeguards to be used in the event the Victorian minister needs to trigger the RRO in response to an emerging risk of significant electricity disruption. The decision to trigger the RRO will be made in consultation with the Australian Energy Regulator and the Australian Energy Market Operator, as well as the Treasurer and the Premier. It will ensure the decision is informed by the most up-to-date information regarding the energy sector and the broader economy. The RRO sets responsibilities on retailers and large customers to secure contracts with electricity producers during periods of forecast lack of supply. This in turn encourages forward contracting, which importantly helps finance much-needed new investment in electricity generation and to avoid supply shortfalls.

The bill will also aim to improve the functioning of Victoria’s wholesale gas market by enabling regulations to be made to increase the maximum civil penalties payable for parties that breach the rules. The change will provide additional flexibility to the Australian Energy Regulator and the courts in determining an appropriate response to instances of non-compliance and help ensure any civil penalties reflect the severity of the conduct and act as a deterrent. This will ensure the compliance and enforcement regime is fit for purpose so that the Victorian gas market delivers better outcomes for consumers and aligns the level –

The DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! I am required under sessional orders to interrupt business now, and the member may continue their contribution when the matter is next before the house.

Business interrupted under sessional orders.