Tuesday, 5 March 2024
Bills
Constitution Amendment (SEC) Bill 2023
Bills
Constitution Amendment (SEC) Bill 2023
State Electricity Commission Amendment Bill 2023
Second reading
Debate resumed.
Danny O’BRIEN (Gippsland South) (14:49): I was disappointed to be interrupted by question time as the wind was taken out of my sails when I was just reminding some of those opposite, who like to say that this bill is actually protecting the SEC from privatisation by the Liberals, as the previous speaker said, of who actually began the privatisation of the SEC.
Members interjecting.
Danny O’BRIEN: Come in, spinner – from the minister at the table. I have actually got the press release here from Joan Kirner, 11 June 1992. The headline is ‘Loy Yang B bill passed by Parliament’, and it includes a direct quote from the Premier of the day Joan Kirner. It says:
The Victorian Government’s decision to involve private investment in this new project is essential to our energy future.
Members interjecting.
Danny O’BRIEN: The Minister for Transport Infrastructure – you can call it whatever you like, Minister. It is privatisation, and if the minister does not like that one, he can talk about the land titles office. We could talk about the Port of Melbourne. We could talk about the VicRoads licensing and registration division. The point is: privatisation when done by Liberals and Nationals – bad; privatisation when done by Labor, past, present or future – perfectly fine, no problem at all.
Members interjecting.
Danny O’BRIEN: Call it whatever you want, Minister, it is privatisation, and this government stands condemned for its absolute charade of the SEC this time around. We heard the then Premier in 2022 say, ‘Offshore wind, not offshore profits’. That was his big pitch: ‘We’re not going to let offshore private companies take profits.’ What did we have at budget estimates last year? I asked the interim CEO of the SEC: will the SEC preclude foreign investors from investment? No, they will not. We also had the Premier say at the time the government will invest as a majority stakeholder. What was the first investment they made – a minority stakeholder with Equus Australia in the so-called big battery out at Melton.
So the government has just fibbed and obfuscated around this from the very start. It misled the public of Victoria into thinking that they were getting the old SEC back. Indeed in the bills that I am actually cognate debating at the moment, one of them is specifically about that. They are actually abolishing the old SEC, getting rid of it, and bringing in their own new one, partly because they did not realise they could not use the logo because the old SEC owned it. I mean, it is extraordinary that the government has got this. The key point in this is that the government is saying, ‘We’re going to bring prices down through the SEC.’ Again, when I asked the minister –
Danny O’BRIEN: Down, down, down. In fact it was the minister’s comment, member for Mildura: ‘Down, down, down’. When I asked the minister for clarity at budget estimates last year on what proportion of the electricity generation sector the SEC will control by 2035 – of course 2035 is when the government is saying we are going to have 95 per cent renewables and everything – the answer was: out of 25 gigawatts the SEC will control 4.5 gigawatts. That is less than a fifth of generation, and somehow magically that is going to bring costs down for Victorians. I mean, this is an absolute con that the government is involved in.
I could go on for hours on this, but I know there are other members on our side and we know the government have suddenly become so very embarrassed by the SEC policy and just what a shambles it is and what a disgrace it is going to be and how it will make no impact on electricity prices for Victorians in future that they have actually truncated debate. So as much as I would like to continue on, I will sit down so that my colleagues get more opportunity to say it, because this government is gagging debate on this legislation. We oppose this. We oppose the SEC. It is a sham to try and put it in the constitution, and the government stands condemned for that politicisation.
Vicki WARD (Eltham – Minister for Prevention of Family Violence, Minister for Employment) (14:54): That was quite a shouty effort. It was a very shouty effort. I am sure it is your passion, but it was still very, very, very shouty. It is nice to have a debate here that is done with a bit of decorum, a bit of calmness, because this is something quite important that we are talking about, it really is. I know on this side of the chamber we understand the potential of the SEC. We understand what the SEC can build, and we struggle to understand why those opposite do not support the investment that the SEC will create in this state and why they do not support renewable energy – oh, no, I do know, because they like nuclear energy. They think nuclear energy is the way of the future, which is a bit shameful, really.
It was interesting, the Leader of the House spoke in her contribution around her experience talking to locals about the SEC. I take on board the member opposite’s comments around misleading people, and there is nothing further from the truth. We spoke to people about bringing back the SEC in 2022, and what we have continued to talk about is the new SEC and what that investment would be for our state – the renewable energy investment that would bring to our state and something that is state owned. We know those opposite do not like anything the government owns. We know that those opposite do not believe in the government owning assets, and that is why they sold them off. They do not believe the government has a role to play in our essential services, and we do not agree with that position.
We said we would bring back the SEC, and we did. We committed to a publicly owned, 100 per cent renewable energy market participant, and this is what we are delivering. Now it will always be government owned; we have made sure it will always be government owned. We are putting power back where it belongs, which is with Victorians. This is one of the very many cost-of-living measures that we are putting in place. I see that the Minister for Climate Action has come and sat down next to me, and I want to thank her, her office and her department for all of the cost-of-living measures that she and her department have put in place, like the terrific power saving bonus, which helps so many Victorians to afford their increased power costs. We see the increases to electricity because of the inefficiency that comes with coal-fired power generation.
As I said earlier, those opposite have opposed and continue to oppose this groundbreaking change that we are bringing about in this state. They have no vision for this state. They cannot see what this state can achieve and the leadership that this state is showing when it comes to renewable energy. They flogged off the SEC, and the private multinational companies increased prices and sacked Victorian worker after Victorian worker, whereas what we are doing is creating a new pipeline of jobs and career opportunities for Victorians in the renewable energy sector. It is Victorian families who have footed the bill, with $23 billion in profits going overseas, and that is a lot more than what the former Premier Kennett charged when they flogged it off. This has been devastating for Victorian households. It has cost Victorian households innumerable amounts of money, and we are changing this. We are well underway.
I want to talk about the jobs that we are going to create in our state and the support that we are giving to the sector and to new people coming into the sector – those who want traineeships, those who want opportunities to come into the renewable energy sector. We have come from a corporation, the SECV, which effectively has no employees, to creating the SEC, which will have employees and which will help the industry have more employees to create more employment opportunities. The SEC will table an annual report under the Financial Management Act 1994 in line with other similar entities. Last year the old SECV was not a separate entity and reporting was included in the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action annual report.
We are getting some real confusion from those opposite, who really do not understand this legislation and do not understand the purpose of what it is that we are achieving here. If we want to talk about transparency and output measures, let us talk about those opposite. Retail energy prices increased by 34.1 per cent under the previous Liberal government – that was from quarter 4 in 2010 to quarter 3 in 2014 – and disconnections doubled from 28,959 to 58,503, leaving vulnerable Victorians without power and heating. I am sure that there will be a few people in this place who can remember when Loy Yang went off power and Jeff Kennett told us to suck up having cold showers for week after week after week. They do not care when the power goes off, they do not care when the water goes off, they do not care when heating goes off.
What those opposite should be transparent on is their disdain of renewable energy and their support for nuclear. They stopped the construction of wind farms and voted against all bills this government has brought forward on renewables and climate action, and just yesterday on ABC radio the Leader of the Opposition was out there saying that nuclear will be a part of their energy mix. The opposition leader has been out coddling up to dangerous climate sceptics, saying:
Even if people have different ideological perspectives on climate change and sustainability, and that is all legitimate in my view, there is nothing wrong with that.
Let us not let the facts get in the way of mischief making, and that is exactly what this is about. The opposition are still afraid of climate change. They are still afraid of engaging on climate change, of engaging on renewable energy and of engaging in transforming our economy to a new economy and the jobs and the opportunities that that transformation will create. They continue to beat the same drum around privatisation, around dead and dying industries like coal and nuclear, and are unable to engage with new industries around renewable energies.
The statewide transition to renewable energy is a whole-of-government approach. We recognise on this side of the chamber the opportunities that this creates, and we embrace those opportunities. As Minister for Employment I am beyond excited that Jobs Victoria has partnered with the Latrobe Valley Authority and Solar Victoria to deliver a priority workforce partnership in Gippsland and Melbourne’s south-east. Unfortunately, we do not have the member for Gippsland South here anymore, who I am sure would also be excited by the opportunities that this will present. The priority workforce projects are designed to deliver secure jobs for people who need extra support finding work and in industries of growth or where there are workplace shortages. These projects work with jobseekers who are in cohorts where finding work can be more difficult, including women aged 45 or over, people who are long-term unemployed, Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander people, people with a disability, people seeking asylum and refugees, newly arrived migrants from non-English-speaking backgrounds, people from CALD communities, young people, single parents and veterans. I do not know why those opposite want to deny opportunities to any of those cohorts – why they would turn to those cohorts and say, ‘You don’t deserve the job opportunities. You don’t deserve cheaper power bills. You don’t deserve a new SEC.’ I do not understand why they would do that. This $2.9 million project will support 130 people into jobs in renewable energy, including working in solar hot water, manufacturing, solar farm assembly and manufacturing renewable energy batteries – all areas that we desperately need. So far 53 jobseekers have been placed in their new careers with businesses, including with Alinta Energy, Exum, PavFab, RACV Solar, PowerPlus and RayGen.
We have also got our jobs mentors. This is a fantastic program doing incredible work. It is through the Jobs Victoria mentor program that we are supporting our transition to renewable energy. The fantastic mentors at Rumbalara Football Netball Club, the Jobs Vic mentor program delivery partners in the City of Greater Shepparton, are working with people in their community who are long-term unemployed or at risk of long-term unemployment. They are finding new careers locally, working with Beon Energy Solutions on new solar farm projects. This has immense benefits to the Shepparton community – a community, I might say, which has 1 per cent unemployment. That is under our watch. That is the work that our government is doing investing in our communities, including our regional communities.
Whether they are working in Gippsland manufacturing solar hot water or whether they are in Shepparton working on solar or whether they are working building wind turbines near Portland, the SEC creates immeasurable opportunities for workers in this state, and it should be supported.
David SOUTHWICK (Caulfield) (15:04): The opposition opposes this stunt of putting the SEC into the constitution. It is an absolute political stunt and nothing more. It is not going to bring down energy prices. We are in a cost-of-living crisis. Victorians are paying more than any other state when it comes to energy prices – a 25 per cent increase in the last year – and yet this government thinks by bringing back the SEC in a back-to-the-future moment it is going to bring down energy prices.
The government know this themselves. The government are saying that it was the Liberals and Nationals that closed the SEC. But they know that it did not work back then, and they know that it was the government of Joan Kirner, the Premier back in 1992, that privatised the energy system. We saw a statement from the Premier herself, saying Loy Yang A:
… will be a state-of-the-art power station …
The Victorian Government’s decision to involve –
the private sector –
… in this new project is essential to our energy future.
She said the presence of Mission Energy in the Latrobe Valley would ensure it was completed on time and on cost. She said:
There are enormous benefits for Victoria as a result of this sale – particularly, continued reductions in the real price of electricity to Victorian customers and improved customer service.
That was the Labor Party back in 1992. In a back-to-the-future moment, they are bringing back the SEC. It did not work in 1992, and they believe it is their silver bullet now. It is simply nothing more than a stunt. The government and the Minister for Energy and Resources have had over 12 months to do something here, and all we have seen are websites that were not even registered but logos that were put up, and then we have seen money that has been invested: money – $380,000 – invested in the SEC. Well, what have taxpayers got for $380,000? They are struggling with energy prices at the moment – an energy crisis and a cost-of-living crisis. $380,000 does not buy you cheaper energy; $380,000 buys you yo-yos, tote bags, pens, all kinds of promo material –
David SOUTHWICK: Hats – all of this stuff. Jelly beans! $380,000 does not bring down energy prices; all it does is fuel the political stunt that says this government is going to do something. Well, the only thing this government can do is spend taxpayers money. They are very, very good at spending other people’s money, and ultimately all Victorians are suffering. You only have to talk to people in my electorate. Many cafes, restaurants, butchers and bakers are struggling to actually keep their businesses afloat, to employ people. I have spoken to a number of cafes that are down 40 per cent in their sales at the moment, yet the price of electricity continues to rise. If you look at the supermarket when you buy things – this government believes that things just magically appear on the shelf without the processes they go through. I can recall just before the election going to Flavorite, who grow strawberries in Warragul. They rely on gas, the very gas that this government wants to turn off. They want to turn off gas in their ideological war to say, ‘You know what – as long as we build up every other type of energy, then it’s good.’ Well, the SEC will not bring down power prices. The SEC is not the silver bullet that this government is looking for. Ultimately, we need supply. As Joan Kirner said back in 1992, we need competition – something that this government is ideologically opposed to. They will not sit down with industry, they will not sit down with investors, and that is why investors are taking their bags and then going to other states.
Now this government is going to make us a net importer of energy. With their VNI network, 25 per cent of energy will have to be imported from New South Wales just to keep the lights on. What a shambolic and hopeless legacy from the energy minister. Something that we were so proud of, being a net exporter of energy: not only did we have a legacy of the cheapest energy in the country, the most reliable energy in the country, but we also helped other states to have the same benefit as well. We are just about to lose that because this government have not managed the energy system, they have not managed the transition, and ultimately all Victorians are paying the price.
Enough of the stunts, enough of the jelly beans and tote bags and wasting taxpayers money – it is time to actually do something to bring down energy prices, and it is time to do something to ensure we do not continue to have a cost-of-living-crisis here in this state.
Kat THEOPHANOUS (Northcote) (15:09): What an exceptional occasion we have before us today with the bringing forth of the Constitution Amendment (SEC) Bill 2023, a bill that holds within it the promise of a brighter and more sustainable future for our state: one in which energy is returned to the hands of Victorians, where our energy sector is rapidly transformed to deliver us our target of 95 per cent renewables by 2035, where 59,000 clean energy jobs are created through monumental wind and solar projects, where profits are reinvested in the people, where our state is propelled towards net zero in the next two decades and where we as Victorians do our bit on the global stage to safeguard our climate. It is nothing short of exhilarating, and in my community the enthusiasm for what the State Electricity Commission will bring and what it signals for our broader climate strategy is palpable.
Sadly, not everyone shares the excitement, nor our vision, nor our determination. The Liberal–National coalition predictably remains grumpy about the prospect of delivering state-owned 100 per cent renewable energy. They would of course prefer the privatisation route, and we have all seen how that has panned out for Victorians – our power assets sold off to big private multinationals, power prices increasing, workers sacked, huge profits sent overseas, Victorian families bearing the cost and our climate bearing the weight of private companies with a singular purpose. It is shameful and it never should have happened – that is why our Labor government is turning it around. It is what we promised Victorians, and it is what we are delivering, because unless you have not realised or heard, the SEC is back. Last October it was registered as a proprietary limited company, and then a few weeks later, in November, the SEC was declared as a state-owned company under the State Owned Enterprises Act 1992. The Premier and the Treasurer each hold one share in the SEC.
Today we are further protecting it by enshrining it into our Victorian constitution. This is a critical step for us, because although those opposite are not generally reliable in much at all, there is one thing we can count on them for, and that is that they will sell off the SEC at the first opportunity if they get their hands on it. They have said as much themselves. It is no surprise really – privatisation is in their DNA. They are addicted to it. They even wanted to privatise sewerage before the last state election. That is why we are not just content to bring back the SEC but enshrining it – protecting it from the whims of future conservative governments and making sure that Victorians can rely on publicly owned energy, clean jobs and emissions reductions for decades to come. Under this bill the government will hold a controlling interest in the SEC, renewables will replace coal and new projects will be owned by every Victorian for their benefit.
The SEC will have some specific features and objectives which I want to touch on because these objectives hold great significance to my community in Northcote. They are what we have been fighting for and pushing the agenda on as we have collectively worked to make Victoria the epicentre of real and rapid climate action. First and foremost, the SEC will be enshrined to support Victoria’s transition to net zero emissions. It will generate, purchase and sell electricity in Victoria. It will own, operate, invest in or participate in renewable energy generation and storage systems and facilities. Indeed the SEC is specifically prohibited from owning, operating or investing in a fossil fuel facility, making it always 100 per cent renewable. Critically, the SEC will supply energy-related products and services to consumers in Victoria and play that really important role as a source of trusted information and support for Victorians to help them get off fossil gas and gain the benefits of reliable, affordable renewable energy.
Our renewable energy targets have never been more important for climate action, for cheaper electricity and for grid stability. The SEC will play a crucial role in getting us to where we need to be, and that is doing our part under the Paris goal of limiting warming to 1.5 degrees. We have traversed a remarkable path since 2014, when only 10 to 12 per cent of our energy came from renewables, our emissions reduction target had been dumped and huge exclusion zones had ground renewable energy investment to zero. Fast-forward to the present, and Victoria has the strongest climate legislation in the country. We are decarbonising at the fastest rate in the country, and we have cut emissions by more than any other state. We are absolutely leading the nation here, there is no question about it. Victoria now has a renewable output of 36 per cent, on track to achieve 40 per cent by 2025 and 50 per cent by 2030. If we can continue on this path, we will reach the colossal milestone of 95 per cent renewable energy by 2035 – a mind-bending achievement from where we were at in 2014. That does not happen by accident, it happens when Victorians choose governments that are focused on real action, energy equity and reform that pushes us forward.
It also happens when Victorians reject the cynicism, virtue signalling and empty slogans that are doled out by the Greens and extremist minor parties. Curbing the impacts of climate change takes galvanisation of support from every sector of our society, yet in the sinister political calculations made within the darkest corners of the Greens party room, they surmise that they can alienate large segments of our community in order to peel off support from others.
So we see the same old tactics: grandstanding media opportunities, destructive and obstructive showboating, blocking of progressive bills. The objective for them is not progress, it is recruitment. Maybe it would be a little less obvious if they actually showed up once in a while for a vote or a debate or put in any actual policy development work. But it is pretty obvious where their motivations are, and it is certainly not with genuine climate action. Actual reform requires the work of bringing communities with you, not alienating them. It takes perseverance, engagement, policy refinement and getting that right balance of incentives, support and legislation to make sure equity and security remain at the heart of our transition – none of which you will get with a three-word slogan on a rock poster.
Labor’s transition supports Victorian households and businesses every step of the way while we are propelling us forward and playing to our enormous strengths as a state. Programs like the power saving bonus, Solar Homes and the Victorian energy upgrades are already making a huge difference. Just a few weeks ago I was proud to join the Minister for Energy and Resources in the inner north, where we announced the Solar for Apartments program. It is something I pushed for in Parliament last year off the back of many conversations in my own community about ways we can make it easier for renters and low-income earners to access solar subsidies and lower their bills. The new program means apartment households can apply for rebates, and in some cases this will cover 100 per cent of the system purchase and installation costs, meaning switching to solar will be free.
This is the kind of policy that makes a real difference in people’s lives, and it builds off our resoundingly successful Solar Homes program, a program that has already resulted in over 300,000 installations of solar PV, hot water and batteries, a program that those opposite wound themselves up in a tizz over because it was apparently too interventionist. If ‘intervention’ means support to households and propelling our state to energy efficient homes, lower bills and less emissions, they might need to rethink their approach.
There is so much to say about the SEC and its value within our energy sector and economy, not least being how it will support a new clean energy workforce. Apprentices and trainees are going to be a key part of this initiative, and the establishment of an SEC centre of training excellence and the development of a Victorian energy jobs plan are key, because we want Victorians to have every opportunity to be part of the renewable energy transition in our state, to access the jobs of the future that will be created as we unlock billions of dollars in investment.
An exciting part of this workforce development is happening at a local school level, with renewable energy pathways now embedded in Victoria’s core offering of VET in schools. This means any student studying VCE, including the VCE vocational major or Victorian Pathways Certificate, can work towards a career in Victoria’s booming renewable energy sector. I know that this is of particular interest and excitement to my community, where in recent years both of our government high schools, Northcote High and Thornbury High, have received significant investment from our Labor government to build dedicated science, tech, engineering and maths facilities to augment student learning. Last year I joined the Thornbury High community to celebrate the grand opening of their state-of-the-art STEAM centre, a utter triumph for that school, and later this year I hope to do the same at Northcote High. STEM jobs are growing almost twice as fast as other jobs in Australia, and we are giving our students every opportunity to access them through the pipeline and pathways that will be offered through the SEC.
This bill and enshrining the SEC in our Victorian constitution is a vital step forward as we embark on a necessary transformation of our energy sector to deliver reliable, secure, affordable and clean energy. I know it is difficult for those opposite to wrap their heads around it, but inertia in relation to the risk of climate change is not an option. We will not be deterred by those opposite – not now, not ever.
Roma BRITNELL (South-West Coast) (15:19): I rise to speak on the cognate bills, the Constitution Amendment (SEC) Bill 2023 and the State Electricity Amendment Bill 2023. This morning I rose and spoke on the government business program about cognate debate on these bills, but since that time the government have again changed their mind and we are going to speak on both the bills now, then we are going to vote on one bill and then we are going to continue speaking on the other bill. What a debacle this whole thing has been right from the outset. The SEC was put forward, let us all remember, just before the election of 2022, and it was to make it sound good – ‘Bring back the SEC’. Everybody wants to see reliable, affordable, renewable energy with a base that actually gives us sustainability and, like I said, reliability and affordability.
What we have got here in front of us is a stunt. The first part of the Constitution Amendment (SEC) Bill is to enshrine the SEC into the constitution. Enshrine what? What have we got? We have had a hundred days since this bill was put in the Parliament. There has not been enough information for the government to even give us a bill briefing. If they cannot give us a bill briefing and they could not get the department to turn up to a bill briefing, then clearly they are struggling to actually tell us what it is that we are getting for our investment in the SEC. So far what we have seen is the government invest in a company that is building a battery that they were already going to build, so it is not going to give us anything different than what we have currently got, which is a market full of a plethora of suppliers. They have just entered the same market and become another one. You do not have to listen to me; the Grattan Institute energy director Tony Wood said the government had made some big statements about the SEC’s ability to provide more renewable energy and push down power prices:
“It’s still unclear,” he said. “The acting chief executive was speaking at a conference in Melbourne …
“I can’t see anything that says the SEC is going to do something that the private sector wouldn’t have done.”
Hence the investment into a battery that was already going to be built. But let us also remember that the government did spend some of the money they have put aside for this SEC, which is just a shell with nothing in it except a bunch of yo-yos, caps with the SEC brand and some nice jackets that they have given out to some people to put around and wear at press conferences while nodding their heads. But at the end of the day there is nothing to see here to benefit Victorians and reduce power prices, as was promised. Power prices in Victoria have gone up by 28 per cent – that is electricity going up by 28 per cent – so how are people who are getting their bills meant to cope with an increased cost of living added to by the energy bills that they are receiving at the moment and added to by the land tax bills that are creating problems for them to be able to provide houses for tenants or for renters to afford the increases in rent? I could actually go on forever about the cost-of-living crisis that is being facilitated and enabled by this government, who continue to put out spin like this SEC, which gave them plenty of votes, they thought, before the election, but has delivered no substance.
Look at the offshore wind farm promise that they have made. We had an offshore wind farm announcement. We had the Premier asserting that a proposal for environment assessments had been done down at the Port of Hastings. Then we had the Minister for Planning Sonya Kilkenny refer the project for environment assessment in October 2023. The Minister for Ports and Freight went down to Hastings and said, ‘Look what we’re going to do here.’ Then we had the minister at the federal level, Minister Plibersek, come forth and say, ‘There’s no way, with the Ramsar wetlands environment that’s down there, that that will ever take place.’ But the Premier has said she will push on despite the environmental implications.
We have also got the minister for energy Chris Bowen saying he does not expect much offshore wind to be operating by 2030, so it is no surprise to me to hear the rumours that are going around Portland today that Minister Bowen is turning up tomorrow to announce that he is going to reduce that footprint by 80 per cent. I am sure the people of South-West Coast will be very happy, because we are very concerned about the whale migration pathway, the Bonney upwelling, which is one of only very few in the world that exist, where the plankton and the krill just come up from the bottom and the depths of the ocean to feed all the whales and the marine life. It is an incredible phenomenon of the ecosystem that exists in that marine area, and we do not want that disturbed if we cannot be confident that the environmental research and feasibility studies have been verified.
Given the government’s push through the Ramsar area that exists down in Gippsland for the energy hub that they are trying to put at Hastings, I most certainly do not doubt that they will fudge some of the results to get their targets through and build their offshore wind farms right across Victoria. But the people of South-West Coast are up in arms, and even a reduction I do not think is going to satisfy them as a suitable outcome, because the whale migration pathway does extend way past Portland. The whales come into Warrnambool in the July–August time of the year, and we do not want a government that is going to muck around with that ecosystem. It is too important to our surfers, it is too important to our families and it is too important to every single person in South-West Coast. We all care about the environment and we all want to see reliable and affordable power, and this SEC is one big scam that is not delivering one jot.
Nina TAYLOR (Albert Park) (15:25): First of all I shall acquit the amendment that is proposed by the opposition, yet again opposing renewable energy – over and over and over. Let me tell you, they have form in this regard. Anyway, the SEC will table an annual report under the Financial Management Act 1994 in line with other similar entities. Last year the old SECV was not a separate entity, and reporting was included in the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action (DEECA) annual report, just to acquit that particular concern that they have put forward. And if we want to talk about transparency, because that has been mentioned a bit around the traps today, retail electricity prices increased by 34.1 per cent under the previous Liberal government – quarter 4 of 2010 versus quarter 3 of 2014 – and disconnections doubled, 28,959 versus 58,503, leaving vulnerable Victorians without power and heating.
I can go on, and I shall, because there is plenty more to talk about in this space. They absolutely strangled wind, let me tell you. The renewables did not have a hope under the Liberals. Pursuant to the legislation that they put in place under Matthew Guy, they made it basically unviable to pursue that industry, and that is why Labor had to get back in – for so many great reasons, not the least being to clean up our energy sector. And of course their automatic default is: ‘Nukes – just whack them in there.’
It is funny. I was on the nuclear inquiry a couple of years ago. I remember that it was a little bit embarrassing because the company that was pushing the SMRs at the time – in the middle of the inquiry, because they were hoping that was going to be their launch pad where they could launch their magnificent technology – had a major setback: years and years of delays for these wonderful SMRs that were going to magically solve everything. Where are we going to plonk them? Are we going to plonk them down at Brighton Beach or down at the peninsula at Mornington? I mean, take your pick: Mordialloc, Anglesea, Albert Park, Port Melbourne? I do not know about you, but I do not think the electorates of those areas – anywhere, really – particularly want them, let alone the waste. Nobody has come up with a long-term solution for high-level nuclear waste. No-one has a solution for that. They just ram it into the ground and hope to God it does not leak into the groundwater. They hope to God, but nobody actually knows. Every hundred years you have to dig it up and repackage it, and who will the poor workers be that have to do that? I would not want to be the person having to do that. These are just some things to consider when we default to that tired old trope ‘Just go nuclear’, because we know what that has led to around the world.
We did talk about cost, so I just want to acquit some of those matters. We know that the cost of gas bills keeps going up and up. We know the best way your slash your energy bill is to electrify your home. In fact Victorians could slash their bills by at least 60 per cent with solar panels. But it is not always easy; it is hard to know where to go for trusted information and what services you can access. That is why the SEC will play an important role as a one-stop shop to help Victorians get off fossil gas and electrify. The SEC will start with pilot solutions this year before rolling it out to all Victorians. While those opposite want to lock Victorians into expensive fossil gas bills, we are helping them slash their bills with more affordable, more reliable renewable energy. There was a lot said about it: ‘Why would you do it? What’s it going to do in terms of saving the costs and saving the burdens for Victorians?’ I do not know if they have done the math on it or there is just some other vested interest. Perhaps the latter; I do not know. I am just putting it out there.
I do want to say – and I know it has already been said by some learned colleagues around the chamber, quite rightly – that we are leading the nation in climate action. It is funny how those opposite never want to dabble in that regard, but I tell you what: there is not a primary school or a secondary school that I visit without the children speaking of wanting to have an environment to live in and a clean planet that will actually be livable and inhabitable into the future. They know – and it is funny that those opposite have not clued into that – and they base that on science. If the kids know, I think the opposition should get on board as well.
I do want to speak to what we have done to date. They are calling this a stunt. Well, let us talk about what a stunt might not look like. Since 2014, 59 projects providing 4471 megawatts of new capacity have come online. There are nine projects currently under construction, which will provide 1314 megawatts of capacity. Is that a stunt? I do not think so.
We have created over 5100 jobs in large-scale renewable energy since we were elected, and this agenda is saving households money one bill at a time. In the 2022 calendar year more than 510,000 households and 49,000 businesses received discounted energy-efficient products and services through the Victorian energy upgrades program. I am still getting to the cost. Okay, on average, households and businesses that undertake energy efficiency upgrades under the program save $110 and $3700 respectively on their annual energy bills. Even those who do not participate will save on bills, with households saving $150 and businesses saving $870 over the next 10 years due to lower network costs.
So when you get out your calculator and add it up, you can see that we have actually thought this through. Our Solar Homes program has had over 300,000 installations of solar PV, hot water and batteries since 2018. That is sending a strong signal to me; I do not know about you. That is dollars and cents not only in terms of savings on energy bills but also in terms of emissions to our wonderful environment as well. Victorians actually get it; they are on board. It would be nice if the opposition took note of that as well. Over 1.8 million homes also applied for the power saving bonus before it closed last year, coming off a successful round 3 of almost 1.8 million applications. So when you look at our record you can see that we have delivered time and time again, but we are only just warming up now – sorry, pardon the pun, when we are talking about global warming – and that is why the SEC is really driving renewable investment forward.
Now, they did say this is just a stunt. I proffer to rebut that further, because construction has already begun on the SEC’s first project, a 1.6-gigawatt battery in Melton with Equis Australia. Let us be clear: because of the SEC this project is happening sooner, is bigger and enables more renewables to come into the system. The SEC’s investment has brought forward delivery of this project and upscaled one of its components from 2 to 4 hours – beyond what the market would have otherwise delivered. You do not just have to take our word for it: the managing director of Equis, the SEC’s partner in delivering the project, said that the partnership had delivered results quicker than they had anticipated. He said:
… if the Premier and the minister would allow me I’d patent –
the partnership –
… and apply it right across the region.
His words, not ours. With over 100 companies lining up to partner with the SEC, there is plenty more to come. That is hardly a stunt. So to those trying to smear those actually in the industry who are telling us that they are keen to be part of this and they approve of the model, that has got to count for something, doesn’t it? I would have thought so.
We are delivering more affordable, more reliable renewable energy owned by Victorians, with every cent of profit being reinvested back into the SEC. Victorians knew this at the election – we were very up-front talking to them. I talked to many, many people in my electorate and they were very keen. They could see the wisdom in it, particularly with these ambitious targets in terms of driving a cleaner energy future and actually driving real jobs as well, putting downward pressure on power prices and also reducing our emissions.
There is an important element here – there are many – but I should say when we are looking at what the bill will amend and we are looking at the amendment to the constitution, the bill will require the state to always have a controlling interest in the SEC. It will provide that the SEC is to have the objects of supporting Victoria’s transition to net zero greenhouse gas emissions – I do not know why they are against that; generating, purchasing and selling electricity in Victoria; owning, operating and participating in the operation of renewable energy generation and storage systems and facilities; developing or supporting or participating in the development of or investing in renewable energy generation and storage systems and facilities; and supplying energy-related products or services to energy consumers in Victoria, from people they can trust. It will prohibit the SEC or the state from doing anything that would result in the state not having a controlling interest in the SEC and prohibit the SEC from owning, operating or investing in fossil fuel facilities.
We are being very up-front and very transparent about what we are delivering for Victorians. Victorians were made fully aware of this at the election, and we have taken it on board and we are delivering as we have promised.
Martin CAMERON (Morwell) (15:35): I rise today to talk on the Constitution Amendment (SEC) Bill 2023 and the State Electricity Commission Amendment Bill 2023. Forgive the dust that is on these papers. I did have them done, my dot points, back in November to read, but unfortunately I had to put them away and bring them out today. That is okay. The state government unveiled its half-baked plan to revive the SEC about 18 months ago, and I might have to take a little bit of the blame for having the SEC coming back, because in the seat of Morwell during the election things were not going to plan for Labor down there, and they actually turned up one day with the old SEC logos, the jumpers, the caps, the bomber jackets that they used to have, and they walked in to hand out their how-to-vote cards because an announcement was imminent that the government was going to bring back the SEC. I may have to take a little bit of the blame for this coming back.
After the release of their official plan, we are really still none the wiser about how the SEC is going to operate and how it is going to help our push into the renewables sector. In all that time and after the fanfare, Labor has done next to nothing to deliver on these farcical pledges. It has invested in one single project, which we heard before, which is a battery. Fantastic. We can do that. But the thing that gets me is that we already have a battery down in the seat of Morwell at Hazelwood, and it is wonderful how we can use a coal-fired power station to generate the energy to be stored in this battery and all of a sudden it miraculously becomes green as it is put back into the system to supply our power. It is wonderful how that can happen. All that Victorians have been given is a vague $1 billion pledge with no independent costings whatsoever that experts say will be woefully inadequate to transition to renewables, and it will come with an estimated cost of about $320 billion.
The Minister for the State Electricity Commission, who is sitting at the table, a couple of sitting weeks ago when talking about bringing back the SEC was adamant and very animated when she said that bringing back the SEC is going to bring our actual prices ‘down, down, down’. The cost of our bills will be coming ‘down, down, down’. I got my bill the other day along with a lot of other people, I imagine every other Victorian, and I opened it up and – surprise, surprise – it had not gone down, down, down, it had gone up, up, up by about 25 per cent. The SEC will not bring power prices down. I do not think it can actually do it. Enshrining it in the constitution I do not think is going to bring down our prices. I am not sure it is going to deliver on the 59,000 jobs, and it absolutely will not deliver enough renewable energy to meet the demand in time for Labor’s accelerated shutdown in 2035 of our coal-fired power stations.
The Latrobe Valley is in my seat, and I need to go in to bat for my workers that work down there in the coal industry that supply the energy we are using here today so I can keep the lights on to read my dot points that I have in front of me, because they have been told that they will be given help to transition out of the coal industry and into the renewable industry. When is that going to happen? What projects are they looking forward to? We have a lot of information and facts and figures and numbers put out by the Labor government stating that we are going to be reaching these targets. Where is the road map? When will this actually happen? Those are the things we are asking down there in the seat of Morwell, my seat, where I am trying to protect the jobs of my constituents.
I could talk about this for hours, but I realise that there is really only an hour and 20 minutes left to be able to talk about this bill before it is disgracefully sent to the guillotine to be voted on. I want the member for Narracan to get up and talk and other members on this side of the chamber to be able to get up and talk in that 2-hour period before we actually get to vote on this.
We are attempting to enshrine the revised SEC in the constitution. Why is it needed? We do not know why. It is the flagship of the government. This was the big one; everyone in Victoria had voted on it. Hey, they did not vote on it in my electorate and in the member for Gippsland South’s electorate. We did not vote for this. To say that the entire people of Victoria have given you a mandate to go forward with renewables I do not think is right. That is enough from me on this. As I said before, with only a few hours – minutes – left before it goes to the guillotine, I would love that the rest of the people on my side would be able to have their say on this as well.
Tim RICHARDSON (Mordialloc) (15:41): It is great to rise and speak on the SEC bill, the Constitution Amendment (SEC) Bill 2023. What an extraordinary waffle we have heard from some of those opposite. They present a position here that they have an opposition to this bill and then provide no substance on any alternative they would put forward. It must drive the minister at the table, the Minister for the State Electricity Commission, spare to then come in here and try to educate those opposite for over a decade on renewable energy policy and investment, which has seen renewable energy targets achieved and investment in renewable energies – our transition leading the nation.
Tim RICHARDSON: The member for Gippsland South has been up and about today. It is all right. There was no substance to it, and you made no sense in your bill speech besides ranting and raving. Now is the time to listen in and tune in and hear a little bit more. While he might have had a lived experience of seeing Barnaby Joyce up close and the policy inertia of those at the federal level, including advising him, and maybe he would have made a bit of sense rather than seeing some of the antics we have seen in climate change policy and renewable energy –
Danny O’Brien: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, I do not believe the member is being relevant to anything to do with the SEC at the moment.
Tim RICHARDSON: On the point of order, Acting Speaker, I know the member for Gippsland South does not understand the substance of this bill, judging by his speech. But if you cannot talk about renewable energy policy in a national context and you do not think that is relevant, you really should not be here.
The ACTING SPEAKER (Meng Heang Tak): There is no point of order.
Tim RICHARDSON: When we talk about costs and price, it is a significant issue to then reflect on the journey that we have had for well over a decade in policy inertia. The policy inertia that we have seen federally substantially impacted on the investment in renewable energy into the future, and that policy inertia has played out across our states and territories, who have had to scale up themselves. We have seen that in New South Wales with the coalition and now a Labor government investment, and we have seen that in a Victorian Labor context, with significant scale-up and investment. The astonishing thing that is put forward by Liberals and Nationals on this bill is not an alternative pathway but a complaint about a policy that was unanimously taken by this government to the people of Victoria, putting that forward.
Danny O’Brien: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, the member on his feet is required to be factual, and the member for Morwell has just pointed out how it was not unanimously accepted by the people of Victoria, quite specifically in the area where the people know the SEC the best.
Tim RICHARDSON: On the point of order, Acting Speaker, the intervention that the member for Gippsland South is running is vexatious. If he listened to what –
Tim RICHARDSON: He is literally just a bit out of control at the moment. Do you want to just take a drink of water, mate? Settle down and let people add their contribution. Acting Speaker, just on the point of order, I said that it was unanimously taken by government. Those opposite have not been in government for over a decade. When we put forward –
The ACTING SPEAKER (Meng Heang Tak): There is no point of order.
Tim RICHARDSON: There is not. I do not know what is going on with the member for Gippsland South. I know that this is a really sensitive topic for those opposite, because for bill after bill they oppose climate change action and renewable energy targets. He can try to deny it for many years to come, but they are the facts of where we find ourselves now. That is why Victorians have substantially supported a Labor government investing –
Tim RICHARDSON: Well, 56 seats, member for Kew, I think is substantial. Increasing the margin of seats each and every time is pretty substantial. The former member for Kew, Tim Smith, being chased around by teals and then the change in policy in those seats is a substantial change. The fact that in Victoria and New South Wales the Liberals have been absolutely slain in their primary is probably a change and a pretty substantial change.
But that is the part of the debate where we find ourselves. That is why we are bringing back the SEC: because it is the right thing to do for Victorians to invest in renewable energies and invest in climate change policy into the future, because jobs depend on it. We need to send a strong signal to our communities that investment in renewable energies, job certainty and creation of those incredible projects into the future and the technology –
Tim RICHARDSON: This is the free marketeer, the member for Kew, who was not here at the time but was an adviser during that time for, what was it, the IPA when the candidate for Frankston, Michael Lamb – ‘free market, leaving it to the markets’ –
Wayne Farnham: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, the member is not being relevant to the bill at all now. Please bring him back to the bill.
Tim RICHARDSON: On the point of order, Acting Speaker, how is talking about the journey of renewable energy not relevant to the State Electricity Commission?
Members interjecting.
The ACTING SPEAKER (Meng Heang Tak): Let me make the ruling. There is no point of order, but could the member come back closer to the bill.
Tim RICHARDSON: Again, it is strikeout after strikeout. You can run interference, but the truth hurts. It does, doesn’t it? The member for Kew’s interjection at the time – and this is a contention that has been put by the coalition – was to leave it to the market. We remember the policy inertia of those opposite when the then Liberal candidate for Frankston said, ‘Coal-fired power stations are our policy. We’ll leave it to the market.’ The market was not building new coal-fired power stations. When that was put on seven occasions to the Liberal candidate, he then gave the policy away – that they would be investing in coal-fired power stations into the future.
Danny O’Brien: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, on the question of relevance, I am afraid we have completely thrown the member for Mordialloc off any train of thought that he might have had. What the Liberal candidate for the seat of Frankston in 2018 has to do with the SEC bill, I do not know. Acting Speaker, I ask you to bring him back to the legislation.
The ACTING SPEAKER (Meng Heang Tak): I have ruled on the point of order, so the member can come back to the bill.
Tim RICHARDSON: It is policy inertia that it gets to this point, and the fact that those opposite have not put any credible policy forward in the time that they have been here, despite our renewable energy target, our investment in renewables and us exceeding those targets, when we see the policy investments in Solar Homes, when we see the battery capacity and the uplift in technologies, when we see wind energy and projects coming forward into the future. These are hard truths. You cannot come into this place on this bill and oppose it and pretend that you have not been a part of all of that policy inertia federally and as put forward by the opposition in this state. It is not surprising that the Liberals and Nationals oppose the SEC. They have not supported a renewable energy policy platform or position in the whole decade that the Andrews and Allan governments have served in this place. That is not surprising thing.
Tim RICHARDSON: We have got the member for Gippsland South interjecting and on the hook again, because it is hard to accept that their policy inertia has contributed nationally to some of the price rises that we see. But it has required state jurisdictions like Victoria to provide that certainty in the future, to invest in renewable energy and jobs certainty, because how would any organisation or corporation have the certainty to invest in our state with the substantial challenges that they faced federally? So it required, then, some policy initiatives to be put forward and to invest in that future.
I want to take those members to the fact that the $1 billion is in addition to a whole policy playbook of investment in renewable energies. It was this government that set ambitious targets in renewable energy and generation. Our offshore wind targets of at least 2 gigawatts by 2032, rising through 2035–2040, are signalling to the market the certainty for the future. They are hard things to hear for those opposite when they are opposed to everything and they stand for nothing, just like we see time and time again, trying to tear down the SEC, which was substantially supported by Victorians. Over and over and over, our renewable energy targets, our investment in climate change policy into the future and how we are scaling up our climate change targets, our target of 75 to 80 per cent reduction by 2035 and zero by 2045 – Victorians get it over and over again –
Tim RICHARDSON: The member for Gippsland South has ranted and raved throughout my whole contribution, because they are hard truths. It is hard to accept this fact in reality that they have not got this policy right, that they have been punished by Victorians in their electoral outcomes federally and at a state level. They are hard truths to hear. They might interject, but that is the truth as we find ourselves here.
When they talk about prices going up, that is a decade of policy inaction by the federal Liberal–Nationals that has played out time and time and time again. That is the reality. That has been independently audited. It is no wonder that the then Liberal Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull tried to bring in a national energy guarantee. All the commentary around that at the time was that the policy inertia to that point did not send a signal to market to invest and scale up and there was no certainty to attract dollars into our nation or into our state.
It is cheap politics and really again a lack of depth and engagement on this bill and on the policy of the SEC to come through here and say that they are opposed and offer no alternatives. Every single position has been the same in their bill briefings – they have been brief, they have not covered anything at all in the substance or what they would do differently other than that they are opposed: ‘Prices are going up, nuclear might be okay, we still support coal and we’re opposed to the SEC.’ Once again they have been exposed for the policy inertia that we have seen for over a decade.
Wayne FARNHAM (Narracan) (15:51): I am pleased to rise today to contribute on the Constitution Amendment (SEC) Bill 2023 and the State Electricity Commission Amendment Bill 2023. Oh, my goodness, haven’t I heard some rubbish today – some absolute rubbish. I am glad the member for Mordialloc brought up some hard truths. I am going to give them some hard truth. The reason the SEC was privatised by Joan Kirner in 1992 was because under government control it ran up an $8 billion debt. Joan Kirner had to sell off the SEC because of the mismanagement of the Labor government back then, which racked up an $8 billion debt. I find it ironic that this government wants to pass the SEC into the constitution so that it cannot be sold. What you are doing now under your government – and your government has history of this – means if it runs into debt, it cannot be sold. We can never get rid of it. We are going to be with the burden of this government’s incompetence on running projects, and it will be there in the constitution.
Wayne FARNHAM: The member for Mordialloc can mouth off at me all he wants. You know what, I built an idiot once, and when I want spare parts I am going to go see him.
I am the only person in this chamber that worked at the SEC, and back then, prior to 1992 – I was there in 1989, I was an apprentice in the annexe at Yallourn – the wheels of the privatisation of the SEC were in motion. We were told, the 40 apprentices in there, that four of us would have a job by the time we finished our apprenticeship, which was in 1991, Loy Yang was going to be sold and the SEC was going to be privatised, and that was all under Joan Kirner. I get sick and tired of this house misleading the Victorian public about who actually started the privatisation of the SEC. They have form on privatisation, don’t you worry about that.
Wayne FARNHAM: There is a list of privatisations, and the member for Mordialloc is just going to sit there and gob off the whole time because he does not like the hard truth. He wanted the hard truth; I am giving him the hard truth. This is what he has asked for; this is the truth. And the fact of the matter is that you are going to pass this into the constitution, you are going to mismanage it, it will run at a loss and then Victorians will inherit another debt. That is the problem. That is why I do not support this bill, because this government has history on it.
My electorate and my colleague the member for Morwell’s are the heart and soul of the SEC. The electorate of Narracan and the electorate of Morwell are the heart and soul of the SEC, and we have seen over many years the struggles of people in Morwell and the flow-on effect down to Narracan that they have had with the war on the SEC over the last decade. When Hazelwood shut, there were thousands of people out of work. The government set up the Latrobe Valley Authority and re-employed, out of the thousands of people, about 400. Four hundred people were re-employed out of the loss of Hazelwood.
You can sit there and tell me all the stuff you want – ‘It’s going to be cheaper; it’s going to be this.’ It is not. There is absolutely no proof to date that it will be cheaper. To date it is not cheaper. It is not cheaper; power prices are up 25 per cent. You are setting targets – your whole wind program went out with the federal government. They absolutely threw it in the toilet. So you have got to redo that. You have to get your SEC up and going again. And passing this into the constitution is just absolute virtue signalling. That is all it is. It is just a show for you guys – you are like a show bag. That is what this government is like; it is like a show bag.
I want to give my colleagues an opportunity to speak on this, because this government has decided we are not going to have a bill briefing and we are going to guillotine this at 5 o’clock. There are a lot more people who want to speak on this who are just as passionate as me about this bill, and that is why we do not support it.
Mathew HILAKARI (Point Cook) (15:56): I always appreciate following the member for Narracan, but I am on my feet actually a little bit earlier than I expected. I am following Liberal–Nationals speakers who were 4 minutes, 4 minutes, 5 minutes – South-West Coast, Narracan, Morwell – all giving up their time because they did not have a lot to say on this bill. Now, I do not know if that is because they are ashamed about their time in government from 2010 to 2014 or they are ashamed about Kennett selling it off or they are ashamed about what they did not do in federal government. I was most interested to see some reporting today in fact where Dutton is saying that he is going to support five or six nuclear sites in multiple states, and that is after a decade of being in government. Of course he decided not to do anything at that point on his nuclear ambitions. But once again Dutton goes to nuclear.
I remember talking just in the last sitting week about energy in this state, and all of those opposite were downcast when I asked them the question, ‘Well, do you support nuclear power and nuclear energy?’ They were all up and about until that point, and I could not understand why they were so downcast when we posed the question. Well, posing the question came to fruition really quickly with the member for North-Eastern Metro Richard Welch. He got up just a few hours later and he said:
If nuclear power is the way to achieve it and avoid the limitations of renewables, they are … happy to have it in the mix.
He was talking about young people, and I am quite shocked by this. I do not think I have met a single young person ever in my life who has said nuclear is the future. It is the future for those who grew up maybe in the 1950s and the 1930s, when they did not realise the consequences – the 100,000-year legacy of nuclear waste.
I am sure the member for Narracan is looking for his nuclear reactor. I am sure the member for Gippsland South is looking for the small-scale reactors in his community; maybe Sale would enjoy this. The nuclear tips in Traralgon – I am sure we are all looking for this. The kilotons of nuclear energy coming out of Kew – they are all looking forward to it, but they are not up and about now. Why aren’t you backing in your national leader? Why aren’t you backing in those other members in the other place of this Parliament and talking up this nuclear ambition?
I think this goes some way towards the reason why they actually oppose the SEC being included in the constitution – because of course they have other ambitions for when they get into government, their nuclear ambitions, and they do not want these nobbled and destroyed by a well-run clean energy program across the state. I think that is really at the end of the day why they oppose it. They keep talking about it, election after election. Before the last election four coalition MPs, including two frontbenchers, would not even put their name to it – they would not even put their name to their support for nuclear energy. They said, ‘It shouldn’t really be ruled out. We should always reassess these things.’ Just last year their members in the upper house voted to repeal the Nuclear Activities (Prohibitions) Act 1983. Of course they would, because they are up for it; they are up for it all the time.
As a result of Kennett’s full privatisation of the SEC we have seen $23 billion in profits going overseas, and that number keeps going up all the time. That is why we need market intervention. We do support market intervention on this side of the house, because these are essential services and utilities that our community relies on, and we have seen so many times that our community relies on these important utilities. The community that I represent is one that is forward-thinking and already making the move themselves, with large numbers of community members owning Teslas, one of the highest rates in the state, and massive amounts of solar energy, because people are making the move. And they need a little bit of support. This government has been happy to support them, whether it is through support for solar panels or support for batteries to harness the very cheap power produced in the middle of the day. Of course we will be there to support them, and we will support the whole community through the reintroduction of the SEC.
Why do we need to safeguard it in the constitution? It is because we know those opposite just cannot help themselves. They cannot help themselves in privatising the things that people in Victoria need, and they just have not been able to help themselves before on so many other projects. We know in Victoria that renewables will replace coal. They will replace gas. This is an inevitability. We are committed to it. We are committed to a pathway to achieving this as well, and we have already started on that pathway since being elected. On 25 October SEC Victoria Pty Ltd was registered with ASIC, and then less than a month later it was declared a state-owned enterprise under the State Owned Enterprises Act 1992.
Of course we will keep moving on this. I have heard many of those opposite argue about why they cannot have more time to debate, while they are not using the time up fully that is allocated to them. Part of the reason that they are so avoidant of these issues is because they simply do not believe in them. They do not believe that the government should have a role in any industry, no matter how vital to the lives of Victorians. They are also not really interested in lowering the cost of living. We heard in question time today of the 500 per cent increase in costs that nuclear power plants would provide for Victorians rather than those that come from solar energy, from wind power – all those things that those people on this side of the house are seeking. It is not just because they are cheaper. It is also because of the net zero greenhouse gas emissions that are associated with them.
The SEC’s objectives are to generate, purchase and sell electricity in Victoria and to own and operate or participate in the operation of renewable energy generation, storage systems and facilities. Of course these are the places that we would invest in, because they actually make a difference to the lives of Victorians and to our power grid. That grid stability has been put so much at risk by the inaction in the last nine years of the Liberal government. It is so disappointing that we are now fixing up the bills for the inaction of that federal government. We have legislated in Victoria to get to net zero by 2045 and our nation-leading renewable energy targets of 95 per cent by 2035. This forms a fundamental part of it, because with climate change here already, with us feeling the effects of climate change today, we must do something about it and we must do something immediately about it. We want cheaper electricity, we want to see grid stability and we want to see us address climate change.
We protect the SEC through this bill by having a controlling interest that cannot be sold off by those opposite, and that would mean that the minister and the Premier hold those shares on behalf of the Parliament to make sure that we can hold them in perpetuity. It requires, once it is in the constitution, a larger majority for this to be knocked over. In fact we are putting a new section, section 107, in place because we want to make sure that for those opposite, who have tried again and again to privatise state assets, it is really difficult to do, and that three-fifths majority is an important protection against these assets being sold off, which our state needs and our state will increasingly need. I think we saw in the Parliament most recently a group of the Indian community come to the Parliament to cook some Indian food on all electric, because this transition is here now. It is happening, and we are going to be leading those transitions on an ongoing basis, because fossil fuels just simply are not the future.
We have precedents for including these sorts of matters in the constitution. One of those was in 2021, the Constitution Amendment (Fracking Ban) Act 2021. I am not sure – I was not in the Parliament at that particular time – but I have the sense that those opposite may well have opposed that.
Mathew HILAKARI: You do mention it is a silly idea to ban fracking. I am surprised that the community you represent in Polwarth – those places like Torquay, Jan Juc and such – would be particularly interested in seeing their beautiful coastline all fracked up. That is a matter for the member for Polwarth of course to work out, whether he supports fracking in the way that he does. Good luck to you, I say.
The Constitution (Water Authorities) Act 2003 also prohibited public authorities with the responsibility of delivering water services from transferring that responsibility as well. Once again we have seen the important matter of making sure we preserve those public assets and institutions and protect our communities. Of course I commend this bill to the house.
Richard RIORDAN (Polwarth) (16:06): I rise today to talk about the Constitution Amendment (SEC) Bill 2023 to put the SEC permanently in the constitution. This government now has had a very disturbing habit of wanting to put all sorts of things into the constitution, that governing document that is there for all Victorians for all time. This government takes cheap shots by wanting to regulate and trying to lock things in place in the constitution regardless of the merit of using our constitution in such a way. It really poses the question: how far would this government go in trying to make a point with the way it abuses and uses our constitution? For example, if we were having this debate back at the turn of the 1900s about transport and communications here in Victoria, would this government seriously have looked at enshrining into the constitution the use of cable trams? Would they have said that we need to make sure everyone has a government-run horse-and-cart service and therefore we need to put that in the constitution? Would we have ensured that in order to expand Victorian railways we put into the constitution and lock in the use of steam trains?
The reality is that technology and the best way to do things evolve and change over time. No-one in this chamber can possibly be definitive about how we will use, consume, absorb and generate energy into the future. A government must allow the best technology, the most efficient technology and the technology that is best for the environment to be used at the time. This government is attempting to put its stamp today on what future generations will need and want and desire here in Victoria and complicate it in a process that could see future generations held up and delayed in taking on the best possible technologies. You could take it further. Imagine back in the late 1980s if this government had had it in its brain to go putting communication technology into the constitution. Would we forever be destined to use Betamax recorders or VHS recorders? Would we in fact not have our iPads but be walking around with a Sony Walkman strapped to our hips?
This is the government trying to pick the winners of the future when it clearly does not stack up. But it is worse than that, because they are clearly being very loose with the truth about what this SEC means. The first thing is – and I refer specifically to the purpose of the bill – they are wanting to enshrine the SEC and to entrench its objectives into the constitution. If we refer back to May last year when the government put its press release out about its initial $1 billion investment into the SEC – hello, government, hello – the average wind farm alone will cost more than $1 billion to construct. Do you seriously think we are going to have any sort of energy company established, built, running and operating and saving the environment for Victoria on the mere smell of $1 billion? It is ludicrous. It means absolutely nothing. It is a cheap shot at the intelligence of all Victorians in the way that they are wanting to lock into the future. I also refer to the press release where it says this will create 59,000 jobs. Hello, government, the whole Victorian renewable energy sector from most recent ABS statistics employs just on 6000 people – 6072 people in fact from the last ABS statistics.
How on earth is $1 billion, which is one-poofteenth – a technical term – of the entire investment in renewable energy today, going to generate some 10 times more jobs than what currently exist across the whole renewable energy sector in the state? It is actually either grossly misleading or an entirely incompetent figure put out by the spin merchants here in this current Victorian government. So there are two lies that this bill is being brought to the Parliament on – two complete mistruths that are being put to this Parliament and the people of Victoria as an excuse as to why this document should be enshrined in our constitution. With such poor research, with such a poor foundation, there is no way this Parliament and both houses should be agreeing to put this type of constitutional change through the Victorian Parliament when it is just not factual.
The release when this came out talked about the desire of this government to lower energy bills and the cost of living, which is absolutely devastating so many families in Victoria at the moment. The government, under its own sort of logic, has only claimed to bring a reduction to people’s power bills by actually getting taxpayers money, writing out a cheque and giving money back to the consumer through their $250 energy bonuses. Do Victorians seriously believe that the way forward is to have an imaginary organisation imaginarily making up 59,000 jobs and creating a renewable energy sector on a billion-dollar investment and that that is going to deliver lower costs? The only way this government has been able to lower the cost of a household energy bill is by actually writing out cheques from Treasury and giving it back to people. That is not sustainable. It cannot be the way that Victoria develops and grows its energy sector, with such poor management and such a poor basis.
If Victorians want to have cheap, reliable, affordable energy, we have to be energy agnostic. We have to be prepared to search the world, look at the best ways to do it and bring the best technology and the best energy options to Victorians and always have an open book as to the best way we can do it. To lock a concept and an idea into our constitution which will forever tie the hands of future governments, future Victorians, future generations, is not only an act of gross irresponsibility, it is unfair to Victorians now and into the future.
To highlight why we will always need to keep our minds open and our opportunities available to all Victorians: just today, only in the last half hour, Victoria’s energy generation from wind was 1.8 per cent of our energy requirement – this afternoon. On a beautiful, clear, productive midweek here in Victoria, with the billions that this government wants to invest into that sector, we are only generating 1.8 per cent of our energy requirement. We are still highly reliant on old fossil fuel sources. This government has banned gas, which is the clear pathway or road map into a future of renewable energy. We have banned that, so that option has been taken from our basket, and we are left with an energy source that on a nice, calm, beautiful, sunny day just simply cannot do it by itself. This bill that we are expected to pass today is enshrining in Victorian law, in the Victorian constitution – tying the hands of future generations – a technology, an idea and a concept that just does not pass the pub test. I cannot support this bill that is coming forward today. I hope that the government and those in the other chamber see reason and do not allow this legislation to go through.
Jackson TAYLOR (Bayswater) (16:14): It is a great pleasure to rise in support of these bills in this place today.
Jackson TAYLOR: Thank you very much, Minister. It is always wonderful to see you at the table. Your brimming smile and loud voice echo through the corridors, but it is nice to hear it in this place. It is a great privilege to rise to talk in support of these bills, and from the very outset can I just acknowledge the fantastic work of our Minister for the State Electricity Commission, who has done a wonderful job in championing not just this legislation –
Jackson TAYLOR: As the member for Yan Yean said, a fabulous minister – that and so much more. We see her day in and day out in this place. You know, she does not just talk the talk, but she walks the walk. She has led nation-leading reform through this place in all of her actions as the minister and of course as the Minister for Energy and Resources, and she should be indeed congratulated for her commitment to having Victoria lead the way and to bringing this legislation into this place. And of course I am grateful to her team and the department, who have done a great deal of work, no doubt, getting this legislation into this place.
Actually, before I get on to that, I just want to acknowledge the member for Mordialloc, who is no longer in the chamber at this point in time, and his fantastic contribution as always. He spoke about something that really gave me the irrits when I was a little bit younger, not in this place. He spoke a bit about – as did the member for Point Cook – in essence the climate wars. I think we have had a bit of that in this place as well, but it has played out certainly on the federal stage over the last 10 to 15 years. We saw in the absolute banger of a series Nemesis three terms of a federal coalition government dithering away on renewable energy and the future of energy generation instead of taking that opportunity by the horns, wasting nine years without having Australia at the forefront of renewable energy production and at the forefront of this issue. Of course it is now pleasing to see, as I believe some of our federal colleagues say, the adults back in charge. We do not hypothesise and we do not use terms like energy agnostic; we stick with the science, we stick with the facts and we actually go where the market is going.
We know that fossil fuel is a thing of the past, we know that private energy companies are leaving – they are packing up shop – and we know that the government has to play a stronger role, and that is exactly what we are doing. We also know that renewable energy is the cheapest form of energy. It is the future of energy generation, and I am absolutely proud to be part of a government that acknowledges that and that takes action on it. What we have heard essentially from those opposite – the member for Narracan said ‘the war on the SEC’; the irony of that comment in his contribution given what we are debating today – which the member for Mordialloc also acknowledged, is no alternative. Where is the alternative? They want to be in the government. They want to be the government, and I tell you what, I am grateful every day I am in this place that they are not, because we are here talking about serious legislation, serious outcomes for Victorian people. And if you do not agree, then what are you suggesting? I mean, Peter Dutton, the leader of the federal opposition, gets accused of being Mr No, constantly negative. The opposition are basically replicating that at a state level. There is no alternative. You cannot come to this place and debate the legislation, serious legislation, that is going to drive down the price of energy.
Yes, it is not going to happen tomorrow. It is going to take time. These big reforms take time, but this government has never shied away from the reality of these types of reforms and making sure we set about them, because the best time to start is today. There are obviously a whole range of measures that we know will be delivered tomorrow or in a month, and of course this reform will continue as long as this government is around. We will make sure the SEC remains in existence via the very mechanism that we are introducing into this Parliament today so that those opposite cannot simply get back into government and privatise it like we know they have done in the past.
I am very glad that our government absolutely do not sign up to the climate wars. We understand the science. We understand the facts. This idea of ‘energy agnostic’, I have got a sense as to what that really means. I do not have people in my electorate going, ‘G’day, Jackson, can you give me a nuclear reactor in Boronia? It’s what we really want in Wantirna in our beautiful parkland.’
Jackson TAYLOR: If it is not good enough, member for Point Cook, for Wantirna – and I bet it is not good enough for Point Cook or for Werribee – then I reckon it is not good enough for the places that the federal opposition leader has mooted. I tell you –
Members interjecting.
Jackson TAYLOR: Tell us where. I want to hear members from this opposition and this place tell me where they want to build these things. Do you agree with Mr Dutton? Really, I would love to hear everyone say ‘No nuclear’. Is that too much to ask? What you are essentially saying is: let us look at introducing what we know is a form of power generation which would take years to come online, is the most expensive form of power and generates waste which no-one wants in their backyard. What we are really talking about here is – I think perhaps part of the issue is – just delaying tactics. For 10 years no-one has talked about it – boom! ‘We’re out of government and we’re in opposition. We’re not going to take ourselves seriously. Now we’re all about nuclear.’ I tell you, I do not reckon –
Jackson TAYLOR: It is toxic, member for Yan Yean. I think people see straight through it. I do not really bet these days, but if I were to have a bet, if they were to have the privilege of being back in government at a federal level I reckon the topic of nuclear might just disappear somewhere. I reckon it would be off the agenda when they have to make the hard decisions and they are back in the cabinet room.
This is just some of the stuff that we are getting in this place today – the same old stuff, the same old climate wars, with no alternatives. The only people who are getting on and delivering real outcomes and listening to the Victorian people – because it is not Peter Dutton and it is certainly not those opposite – are this government. We have always been at the forefront, nation leading. In fact when you look at the measure of some of our targets and what we are on track to achieve with our renewable energy targets as well as our net zero emissions targets, we are absolutely global leading. That is something to be very, very proud of, make no mistake about it.
The minister was in here earlier today talking about our opposition to nuclear. I am very happy to say that I do not support nuclear energy. No-one in my community wants to see a reactor in Boronia, Wantirna or The Basin. It is just absurd. Let us stick to facts, and let us get real here. What we are debating here today will make a huge difference for Victorians. The Liberals of old, we know, loved privatisation. We know that, formerly, Jeff Kennett, as the member for Mordialloc said, was very proud of his work in privatising the SEC, when I was two years old. I do not remember it personally, although I have read and I have looked. Being two years of age, it would have been hard for me, although I am sure my parents were very concerned about it. We are not going to let the Liberals, if they are lucky enough to occupy the chairs of government, roll back and privatise what is government-owned energy – not run for profit, not $23 billion of profits or thereabouts rolling back overseas.
We are going to run it for people, and it is not just an election slogan – mind you, a very good one. When I was out and about on the doors, I spoke to a number of people. For them this was the defining issue of the last election. It for them was why they voted Labor, why they voted for me and why they backed in a third-term Labor government in the state of Victoria. They know what we have delivered. We have absolute credibility when it comes to this. Our contemporaries in other jurisdictions understand what Victoria is about. When I was out there knocking on thousands and thousands of doors, this for them was a critical piece of policy.
That is exactly why we are going to get on with it, despite the noise and the protestations from those opposite, who of course, if they are lucky enough, may be here, as I discussed. We have heard from some. They are ready to start the privatisation talks, and then they ask, ‘Well, why do you want to put it in the constitution?’ Why? Because we are listening to you. We already know what a future Liberal government would do. I certainly hope that we are not going to see that any time soon. I absolutely support government-owned energy. I support these bills. I hope to see some voice and some reason from those opposite and maybe even a few alternatives. If you do not like it, then what are you suggesting?
Tim READ (Brunswick) (16:24): I rise to speak on behalf of the Greens on the Constitution Amendment (SEC) Bill 2023, one of the two SEC bills being debated this afternoon. This bill proposes to entrench clauses relating to the SEC in the constitution by way of a special majority, which requires the bill to have three-fifths support of both houses. Should this be achieved, these clauses may only be amended or repealed in the future by way of the same special majority. Bringing back the SEC was the major Labor election announcement in 2022, but it has since become clear that, apart from the logo, this resurrected SEC bears no resemblance to the old SEC. It is not going to renationalise our energy generation, it is not going to directly sell power to Victorian households and, despite what was promised, it is not even going to ensure majority public ownership in the projects it invests in.
The first project, for example, a Big Battery, will still be majority owned by a private corporation, with a legal obligation to maximise their profits at the expense of Victorian consumers. It will not stop Labor from allowing new coal and gas projects. The Greens support efforts to bring in more renewables and genuine government ownership of essential services, but whether or not this new small SEC is the way to go about this is at best debatable. It is somewhat disturbing that not one independent energy expert from academia, industry or our peak climate agencies has called for this policy to speed up the transition to renewables as Victoria phases out coal. It is more disturbing that the former Premier has since conceded the announcement was as much about good politics and positive focus group feedback for Labor’s election campaign than anything beneficial for the climate or Victorian energy consumers.
Instead of an old logo, what energy experts in the renewables industry have been calling for is a clearer and more efficient planning process to get projects off the ground – a clearer plan for what Victoria’s future electricity grid and renewable energy generation mix will look like, further industry and consumer regulations and incentives to electrify the state and a detailed jobs and housing plan to make sure that Victoria actually has the workers to build the renewable projects that have been approved. I might add that it would also be a good idea for the Victorian Labor government to start talking to the federal Labor government ministers so that they stop unexpectedly blocking major renewable projects at the last moment as well. But unlike the rest of Australia, Victoria is yet to do any of these things.
Victoria has reasonably good renewable energy targets, particularly for 2035, but instead of the clear plan on how they will be achieved, it has so far only achieved a retro logo on the Premier’s jacket and some shiny brochures. In the short term the government’s $1 billion investment in the SEC may help patch over this absence of a long-term infrastructure plan for a few small renewable projects that would otherwise have failed to get off the ground, but the fact that the government has so far announced total statewide investment for the SEC at a scale of less than a 20th of the amount that it is spending on a single new toll road starkly illustrates the inadequacy of the SEC’s financial resources for this purpose.
According to the Department of Transport and Planning website, excluding hydro Victoria has more megawatts of renewable energy facilities approved but not operational than it has projects awaiting planning approval or under construction or currently operational combined. Some 11.35 gigawatts worth of renewable projects on the website have planning approval but are not being built right now. We urgently need to find out what the key issues are stopping these projects from becoming operational and have a plan to fix them. If the best way to get these projects operational is indeed via direct public funding, then the government needs to allocate a lot more money to the SEC than the token amount it has to date.
But if the new SEC does not make a lot of sense from a policy point of view, it makes even less obvious sense to seek to put it in the state’s constitution in the way that this bill proposes to do. The bill proposes to entrench the objectives of the SEC in the constitution along with requiring that the state always have a controlling interest in the SEC, and it prohibits the SEC from owning, operating or investing in a fossil fuel facility. We were informed by the minister’s office that this is to futureproof the SEC from future governments, but it is apparent that all that is being futureproofed is the Victorian government owning and using the SEC logo and brand, not any of its tangible state-owned renewable energy assets or its investments. What is proposed will not prevent current or future governments from continuing to facilitate new fossil fuel projects outside of the SEC, such as the current coal-to-hydrogen project in the Latrobe Valley. Stranger still, the bill does not appear to explicitly prohibit a future government from selling off most or all of the new SEC’s new assets to the private sector, just as the former Labor Kirner and Liberal Kennett governments did with the old SEC in the 1990s.
What good is it to have a constitutionally enshrined and government majority owned SEC that has no assets and does nothing, while permitting future Victorian governments to back as many new coal and gas projects as they like? The Greens struggle to support this bill if it has no purpose beyond its apparent clever election campaign politics, as doing so would only serve as a distraction from the very real challenges of climate change and the energy transition in Victoria like those I have already outlined.
We need to see that the bill is actually meaningful in addressing climate change, and that is why I have amendments circulating today. We certainly will not rule out producing further amendments as it moves to the other place, in particular something to make sure that any SEC-owned assets and investment – currently $1 billion – cannot be privatised like the last SEC, which in my opinion is really the only genuine reason for putting the public company in the constitution. But for now, under standing orders, I would like to advise the house of amendments to the Constitution Amendment (SEC) Bill 2023 and kindly request that they be circulated.
Amendments circulated under standing orders.
Tim READ: In the first of the amendments, proposed new section 108 establishes in the constitution that the SEC must by 2035 own, operate or participate in the operation of generating systems that have a combined capacity to generate not less than 4.5 gigawatts of electricity by utilising renewable energy sources or converting renewable energy sources into electricity.
The Greens believe this amendment is necessary to ensure that future governments do not reduce or abandon the current government’s stated commitment to the minimum amount of renewable electricity that will be generated from SEC projects or, to put it another way, to insert a constitutional requirement for the SEC to actually produce something tangible in terms of renewable energy generation. To further support this, the government will also be required to report each year to Parliament on how the SEC is tracking towards producing electricity and how this fits into the state’s overall legislated renewable energy targets.
The second amendment proposes new section 109, that the SEC cannot be a leviable authority for the purposes of part C of the Financial Management Act 1994. A leviable authority under the FMA is a public authority such as a publicly owned company that can be charged what Treasury calls a ‘financial accommodation levy’ into the government’s Consolidated Revenue Fund. The idea for this kind of levy or tax on public companies came about as part of the national competition policy in the 1990s, which stressed the need for competitive neutrality between public and private companies when private corporations increasingly started to take over the delivery of government services. The levy does this by taxing public companies at a level equal to any competitive advantage they may have over private companies in delivering the service, in particular public companies’ access to lower borrowing costs.
The economic orthodoxy of the levy is highly questionable, because if public companies have to be taxed to make private companies competitive, it begs the question of why we need private companies in the market at all. There is also a strange irony if the government were to apply the same levy that helped state governments break up public monopolies like the old SEC in the 1990s to the new SEC in 2024. Moreover, we are concerned that the practical effect of any levy would be to divert profits from the SEC not into more renewable projects as promised but into consolidated revenue, where it will be used to fund a whole range of government activities – including those that may contribute to higher emissions and climate change – which are contrary to the aims of the SEC. The Greens also reject the idea of a tax on public ownership that will ultimately have to be paid for by consumers. We believe the public should enjoy the benefits of public ownership, not pay more for it.
I have already indicated that we are still looking at introducing future amendments to this bill as it moves to the other place, and we have appreciated the minister’s office having open discussions with us about this. There still remains a rather large elephant in the room, and that is the broader picture of Victoria’s energy emissions, because there is still the same minimum policy requirement in terms of whether we are aiming to avoid the catastrophic effects of global warming moving above 1.5 degrees, or even just meeting a less ambitious target, and this is that governments do not approve any new fossil fuel projects. This is a prohibition on all new fossil fuel energy projects, whether they are ultimately funded by the SEC, a government or by the private sector. The same carbon will be released into the atmosphere whether it is funded by the government or the private sector.
The math says that only prohibiting fossil fuel projects for the relatively small investments that will be made by the SEC, as this bill seeks to do, while simultaneously allowing the construction of bigger coal and gas projects by the private sector, would result in a net increase in Victoria’s energy emissions. This is simply not an acceptable climate policy, and certainly not while the bush around Mount Cole outside Beaufort is still smouldering.
As the only party with a clear message that there can be no new coal and gas, it will be no surprise that the Greens will introduce further amendments to this bill in the Legislative Council to extend the proposed constitutional ban on the SEC investing in any fossil fuel facilities to a complete constitutional ban on the construction of any new fossil fuel facilities anywhere in Victoria. It is of course also an amendment that will be consistent with the repeated calls from the United Nations to governments across the world. But more importantly, it is an amendment which will mean Victoria will finally stop trying to pour even more fuel onto a fire it is supposedly trying to extinguish. For the Greens to support this bill in the Legislative Council we will need it to be more than just tokenistic. It must be amended so that it actually accelerates the state’s transition to renewable energy and lowers Victoria’s carbon emissions. It does not do this currently, but the Greens are prepared to work in good faith with the government to try and fix it.
Josh BULL (Sunbury) (16:36): Acting Speaker De Martino, I am delighted to see you and delighted to have the opportunity this afternoon to contribute to these historic pieces of legislation as this government builds upon our strong and proud record of investment in clean, cheap and renewable energy and of course the formation of the SEC. I do not propose this afternoon to spend too long speaking about those opposite and the contributions that they have made for some time this afternoon. However, as we deliver what is indeed a historic piece of legislation and deliver on our commitment to the Victorian community to what was a hallmark signature election commitment, those opposite today have spent their time playing cheap political games and waxing lyrical about jelly beans. What we know on this side of the house is that that strong, sustained investment in renewables, which we have had the opportunity to deliver in now nearly a decade of being in government in this great state of Victoria, has meant that we have achieved some significant and important commitments to the people of Victoria right across this state. That is something that is by no means by chance, and as a number of members on this side of the house have mentioned in their contributions, this has been through sustained investment, through budgets and through initiatives on the ground. And many, many people have taken part in important work to ensure that we are doing everything that we possibly can to drive down the price of energy in this state and of course ensure greater protections for the planet.
The choice could not be clearer, and that is to support that investment in cheaper renewable technology or in fact to do nothing – if not do worse than that, and that is to oppose and block every opportunity that we take on this side of the house to invest in renewables and of course the formation, the creation, or the bringing back, I should say, member for Footscray, of the SEC. We are getting on and putting the power back in the hands of Victorians, accelerating that transition to cheaper, more renewable energy. We know that construction has begun on the SEC’s first project, the 1.6-gigawatt battery near Melton to power over 2000 homes. We know that by storing excess cheap energy in battery systems, homes and businesses will also benefit. By powering the state through renewables, more often than not we avoid that reliance on expensive coal and gas which causes those significant rises in bills. We know within our local community, as you move around your local community – and I know that other members have spoken about it this afternoon – that there is a real sense. We saw this through the campaign, but we have seen over the past decade that there is a strong commitment within local communities to see the delivery of renewable energy.
People know and understand that by investment in science and investment in technology and much of the framework that is within this piece of legislation but also through all of the investments that have been made – and I heard the member for Bayswater talk about many of these investments within his local community and others – that by sustained and strong investment within this portfolio area but working across other portfolio areas, whether that be transport, whether that be education or whether that be health, the benefits of all of this come together to form that critical network, that pathway to cheaper, more renewable, more reliable energy, something that this government is committed to.
Unfortunately what we saw for 10 years, if not more, from those in Canberra, the former LNP federal government, was just a policy vacuum. A decision that this government had to make was to go it alone, to step up and stand up and do the things that we needed to do as this state to show real leadership, not a policy vacuum. But imagine what could have been done in this state and, critically, right across the country, if we had had strong, sound, sustained leadership in Canberra in this space. Unfortunately we did not get that. So we made decisions very early on in our term of government to get on and do the important things that we know Victorians support and need and of course our environment desperately needs.
The science has been incredibly clear, and we, sadly, in many ways have had to waste time, energy and effort in a debate about science that should not have happened. This is a position that we formed very early on, because it is startling when you put science above ideology, when you use fact instead of fiction, when you actually listen to people that have spent years in research and tech and science and doing the things that actually matter. Good governments will always be guided by the science. Good governments will always respond and listen to those in medicine that are doing work in medical fields – amazing work – and those in science that are doing incredible work in this space. We saw this through the pandemic. We see this with energy. Why is it that those opposite fail at each and every opportunity to respect those that are in science and to respect those that spend years and decades of their lives providing advice to government that is then simply ignored? That is not the show that we are, and that is not a show that we will ever be.
This framework sets out a critical pathway forward for the SEC. We know, and other members have mentioned them – I will not go through all of the commitments and financial contributions that have been mentioned, but I did just want to touch on our workforce. We know that with support for workforce development and attraction through new avenues both as an employer and through training and through advocacy, the transition to 95 per cent renewables is expected to create more than 59,000 jobs as well as 6000 apprenticeships and traineeships by 2035. We all can remember much of the doom and gloom and much of the rhetoric that is put out around job losses. But what we know, and I go back to that fundamental principle about investment in science and investment in strong and sustainable renewable energy, is it creates more investment, and we know that this is where the market is heading.
We are indeed as a state leading in this nation on climate action. We smashed our 2020 emissions targets of 15 to 20 per cent reduction by achieving 29.6 per cent.
Josh BULL: Absolutely, Minister, and in 2021 we achieved 32.3 per cent. That is not just talking about change when it comes to climate action, that is actually delivering it. We of course hear many contributions from the Greens political party in this space. What we know, member for Frankston, is that it is very easy to provide a running commentary on all the things that should have been, all the things that should be done and all the things that did not happen.
Josh BULL: Put it in the newsletter – absolutely, member for Point Cook. But what we know and understand is that when you do have the privilege, the profound and unique opportunity to be in government, you need to make decisions that are of course balanced and that work across all portfolio areas but most importantly that are practical.
One of the things that I know I am particularly proud of and I know the member for Footscray is very proud of as well – and indeed all members on this side of the house are – is that ability to be able to deliver in this space critically and importantly and practically but also to know and understand that we can deliver in this space and make transformative investment that is going to benefit our community not necessarily just today and throughout the course of 2024 but for generations to come. When we look at the smallest people within our community, the little tiny tots that are running around, the five- and six-year-olds, we know that this legislation that is before the house today will benefit those people.
I know that that is something for Ned, Tilly and Cleo and the whole range of little ones that are out there. I know that that is something I am very proud of, and I know that that is something members on this side of the house are very, very proud of, because we know that investments for the future are some of the most important investments that we will ever make. It is for those reasons and all of the other reasons mentioned by many of my colleagues in their stellar contributions this afternoon that I commend this bill to the house.
Tim BULL (Gippsland East) (16:46): It is a pleasure to rise and contribute to this cognate debate on the two SEC bills that are before us. It has been a rather interesting debate, sitting down in my office listening to some of the contributions. Some of those on the other side have labelled this as a vote on renewables. Personally speaking, and I am sure I am speaking for the majority of people on our side, I hold the view that, quite simply, policy should not be included in our state constitution. I do not often agree with the Greens – in fact I have been in here 13 years and I doubt I ever have – but the member speaking for the Greens made the comment along those lines: that policy should not be included in our constitution and also that we need to have more information on how this is going to be structured. It was a pre-election policy, and here we are, a significant amount of time on from that election, and we still know very little more than the basic framework – and we are talking about enshrining it in our constitution.
First of all, I want to make the point that this was something that pre-election those opposite wanted to talk about for a long, long time. It was labelled as the Holy Grail, and it was going to solve all of our energy problems – yet here we are having this go into the guillotine tonight with debate being very limited. One of the government speakers asked, if it is such an important thing, why we are only speaking for 4 or 5 minutes each. Well, you shake your head, because there are a lot of people who want to speak on this and want to make a contribution, and in the time frame that we have been allocated, members on this side of the chamber have had to reduce their contributions to allow as many people as possible to speak.
The thing I find a little ironic about this is that every effort has been made to enshrine the SEC in our constitution so a future government cannot alter it, and there have been points raised and commentary made from those opposite around privatisation, but this government itself has a long list of privatisations. It privatised the Port of Melbourne and it privatised the titles office, just to name two. There were more. This government privatised the licensing arm of VicRoads. It talks about concerns over privatisation when it suits, but when we have issues like this, it wants to put into the constitution that this cannot be changed and that the SEC cannot be privatised. It is a little bit hypocritical to be saying that.
I also want to talk about the privatisation of the power sector. I have heard some of the counter claims coming back and forth across the chamber around who started the privatisation of our power industry, so I thought I would do a bit of research while I was sitting there this arvo having a look. I dug up this media release from 11 June 1992 from the office of the Premier of Victoria of the day, Joan Kirner, and it actually quotes the Premier with this comment:
The Victorian Government’s decision to involve private investment in this new project is essential to our energy future.
The Premier then also talked about it providing the framework for the future in Victoria’s power industry generation. It then goes on to say:
Following a keenly-contested bidding process …
So I think that this media release from the Premier, which I will provide to Hansard, finally puts this to bed once and for all, saying that half of Loy Yang is being privatised. There is no further argument to be had there. I have heard the member for Essendon say on occasion that this was more of a partnership. Well, it is here in black and white that the Premier was using the word ‘privatisation’.
The member for Narracan touched on this earlier. He was a second-year apprentice fitter and turner in 1989, and he has said – I think it was in his maiden speech as well – that they were told that only four of the 40 apprentices would have a job when they finished at Loy Yang B because the industry was being privatised. The member for Sunbury went into the federal sphere, so I will touch on that for a moment. When we are talking about privatisation and the concerns on this side, I have mentioned some of the things that were privatised under this current government, but at the federal level we also look at things like Qantas, we look at the Commonwealth Bank, privatised by Labor governments of the day. But now we are seeing fit to try and enshrine in our constitution ‘No change here’.
I want to point out that we are very open to knowing more about how the SEC is going to function and how it is going to drive down energy costs, because all we have heard in the subsequent 14-odd months since the election – probably 15 months now – is the repeating of the slogan that it is going to drive down energy prices. That is very difficult to believe and have faith in when the Minister for Energy and Resources stood up here last sitting week in the chamber and said, ‘Energy prices have gone down, down, down.’ I am not sure what planet she has been on, but every Victorian’s energy prices have been going up, up, up, to the level of 25 per cent or higher, we hear being quoted by Victorians all around the countryside. So when we have our energy minister saying that energy prices have gone down, down, down for people when they have absolutely skyrocketed through the roof, it is very, very difficult to take at face value what she is saying about the SEC and how it is going to drive energy prices down. If it is going to, fantastic – but tell us how it is going to do that and how it is going to play out on the ground before we look at enshrining it in our state constitution. Give us the detail of this scheme and project that you are wishing to have enshrined in the constitution.
The Victorian community will obviously be monitoring this over time, and a lot of people have gone on the record saying this is going to be a fantastic thing. We have heard that it will revolutionise the Latrobe Valley. Well, the Latrobe Valley was promised an electric vehicle manufacturing plant by this government that was going to employ an extraordinary amount of people. It was going to be one of the major employers, or the major employer, in the Latrobe Valley, and it eventuated to duck eggs – absolute doughnuts. It fell over and nothing eventuated whatsoever. So the concern that we have here is that over two years on since we had the SEC announced and have all been told how great it is going to be, we know really nothing more than the slogan and the logo that came out. We do not know how it is going to drive down energy prices, how it is going to be a key player in the marketplace, how it will have an effect on household energy bills.
I also just want to reiterate before I finish: as far as we are concerned on this side of the chamber this is not a vote on this bill about renewables, this is a vote about whether we should be enshrining something that we do not know much about in our state constitution. I do not think that that is wise, and it has been called a stunt. Why would you enshrine state government policy in our constitution? There is no need for that to be done at all. This bill should be able to be debated and discussed when we have more detail on it, and that is why we will be opposing this bill.
Katie HALL (Footscray) (16:55): I am absolutely thrilled to be speaking on this bill and to be delivering on an election commitment that was so popular in my community in Melbourne’s inner west. I think sometimes nostalgia gets a bad rap. The reason people are nostalgic about the SEC is because it was good, so there is real pride in what the SEC was as an institution, as a publicly owned institution. I know on the other side of the chamber they are all a bit iffy about publicly owned institutions. I remember not all that long ago under the Abbott government that they sacked all the climate scientists at CSIRO. There is this absolute disbelief in the science of climate change on that side of the chamber. There is a complete disregard in the publicly owned institutions that do so much for the people of Victoria.
The SEC is back, and I am so happy that it is back. I know that what it will do is deliver real action on climate change, and it will be owned by the government. That is something that people in my community were so excited to talk to me about. Everyone had stories about the SEC, because it was a great place to work as well. We are delivering great jobs, renewable energy and a publicly owned company. The reason it has to go into the constitution is because those opposite cannot be trusted with our great publicly owned institutions. When the Liberal Party sold off Victoria’s energy supply to private multinationals, we saw what happened. The consumers of Victoria suffered.
If there is any bigger issue than climate action right now, you would not know about it when you listen to those opposite, because they are doing kite-flying exercises and talking about nuclear power. I look forward to having those conversations with residents in my community who have very strong views about these sorts of issues. The Liberal Party do not know where they stand on climate action. They do not know where they stand on nuclear energy.
Katie HALL: The member for Brighton is interjecting because he knows that I am speaking the truth. They are all over the shop. There are also some in the chamber – well, they are not in the chamber; they are never in the chamber – who like to speak about people power. This is putting power back in the hands of the Victorian people. This is something. This is real action from the Labor government on climate and also driving down the cost of power bills. We are going to be decarbonising faster than any jurisdiction in the world. Our climate targets are world leading, and the SEC is going to be a great pillar of our climate action.
I know that the nostalgia we have held for the SEC in the past will continue into the future, because we are going to make sure it can never be taken away. I know that in Melbourne’s inner west, where we talk often about climate action and the importance of real action to tackle climate change, the SEC was an absolute no-brainer. It is something that people remember fondly because it delivered great outcomes. We know that it can do it and will do it again, and it has to be protected from the Liberal Party so that it is never taken away from the Victorian people. Our energy supply, having lower costs in energy and also taking decisive action on climate change, as we have done with the battery project that we have launched in Melton – this is an incredible start for the SEC. I am enormously proud to make a contribution on behalf of my community.