Wednesday, 19 February 2025

Bills

Energy and Land Legislation Amendment (Energy Safety) Bill 2025

Second reading

Debate resumed.

John PESUTTO (Hawthorn) (18:07): When we broke I was talking about the comparative costs of importing gas, bearing in mind that you have to liquefy the gas, ship it and then regasify it before it can be made available for use by industrial customers and households. Not only will that add somewhere in the region of $4 a gigajoule, but there is a deeper and more profound implication that comes from being a state that has to import all of its gas at an increasing rate as existing reserves are depleted. It means that you will see over time a wealth transfer from Victoria to other states and other jurisdictions from whom we have to purchase gas supplies. When you think about our energy sector it is one of the foundational sectors that is there to support a growing economy. For any government to be able to deliver a rising standard of living while minimising the cost of living you have to achieve that security of supply at affordable prices in areas of energy, but you also have to deliver a health system, an education system and a mass transport system to support that community. If you are having to import such a staple resource as gas, you can only expect that over time you become a poorer state for it and your standard of living will decline. We know that you cannot simply wish away the problem, as the government wishes to. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), an independent agency, reports that demand for gas on the eastern seaboard will remain stable. In other words, there will be no appreciable decline in demand for the next 20 years.

Gas is there not only to support the transition as a peaking fuel. Remember that many industries – glass, bricks, packaging and so many other gas-reliant products – cannot be subjected to the transition to electrification easily or at all, and those that can, particularly bricks and glass, can only be done at great expense to consumers and to businesses.

Ensuring that we have a local supply of gas is vital for that reason. We face a real shortfall as the Australian Energy Market Operator and the ACCC have reported repeatedly, along with industry leaders.

Coupled with that, it is hard to understand what the government’s plan is in relation to ensuring we have reliability of supply. We know that Yallourn is scheduled to close at this point in June 2028 and AGL’s Loy Yang A in 2035. When and if Yallourn shuts in June 2028, what will replace it? If we are importing gas, that will come at a higher price for industrial and residential customers. But what is to replace it, and how do we ensure that we have reliability of supply? We know that many wind and solar projects operate – projects that I have no objection to if they can be connected to the grid in a way which delivers affordable and reliable energy at times people need it, not just in the middle of the day when there is a glut of rooftop solar in particular – but what do we do to ensure that we have that reliability? That cannot be an easy substitute for the vacation of Yallourn in June 2028. I would like to know from the government – the Minister for Energy and Resources is at the table – what discussions there have been, if any, about extending Yallourn beyond June 2028, because it is hard to see what will replace it. The government talks about its offshore wind energy targets as being a key source to replace our retiring coal fleet, but we know from the Port of Hastings debacle in relation to the Victorian renewable energy terminal that fell apart last year, when federal Minister Plibersek denied the application, that that has delayed that project. That will be a hub, we are told, for offshore projects in the Gippsland zone. But it has been delayed from 2028 to 2030 at the earliest, so we are unlikely to see offshore wind come online anytime soon. So how does this government assure Victorian businesses and households and global investors in our state that we have an energy system that can reliably be invested in?

Instead we are presented with this bill at a time when increasingly questions are being asked about that energy future in this state. Again, the obligation of any government is to deliver the highest standard of living with the lowest cost of living, but all we are seeing is increasing questions around the unreliability of that energy supply and the cost that will come with that. We know that gas will be more expensive for the very reasons I have outlined – if we can secure those gas supplies. We know that offshore wind is not coming anytime soon, and the government has not been up-front with the Victorian people about what is happening with Energy Australia’s Yallourn and AGL’s Loy Yang A and whether they will terminate on the current scheduled closure dates.

This bill shows a government confused about what its priorities ought to be. In other words, it is relieving itself of the obligations of scrutiny while imposing heavier sanctions on the workforce that we will need to deliver that energy transition – which I support, but so long as it is done in an orderly and responsible way. Not only does this bill highlight that contradiction in the government’s failed attempts to demonstrate it has an energy plan, the bill itself highlights the absence of a vision for how you deliver a prosperous economy based on an energy system that can give people access to energy, whether they are industrial or residential customers, at prices they can afford as and when they need it. This bill is a missed opportunity more than anything else to give Victorians the security they need and an energy system they can rely on.

Jackson TAYLOR (Bayswater) (18:13): It is a great pleasure to rise and speak in support of the Energy and Land Legislation Amendment (Energy Safety) Bill 2025. From the very outset can I say a very big thankyou to the responsible minister and her team and everyone at the department for all of their fantastic work in what is a very important piece of legislation, as has obviously been debated and discussed here in this place. I just want to acknowledge and reflect on a few contributions from colleagues. In particular I note that the member for Tarneit, who is not in this place at the moment, spoke about the importance of energy efficient appliances and electricity being cheaper than gas at the moment and that this government’s policies and our reform agenda in the energy space is putting money back into people’s pockets. This legislation is another example of the Allan Labor government moving with the times, moving with the sector and making sure we support households and support businesses with the energy transition, as was detailed by the member for Albert Park so eloquently.

And the member for Clarinda as well spoke about how the Australian Energy Market Commission has projected that over the next decade electricity retail prices in Victoria will reduce by 9 per cent, keeping rates cheaper than anywhere else in the country. That does not happen by mistake; that happens because you have an Allan Labor government making the necessary reforms with a fantastic minister leading the charge, with a great team and a department of people working with stakeholders and working with the community to get not just this legislation but all the legislation that has come before it through. Lo and behold it sounds like those opposite will be opposing this legislation, but that is not a surprise given the amount of legislation that pertains to these portfolios. I am not sure what the hit rate is, but the percentage would be quite low – if I could guess the amount of times – that those opposite have supported legislation that pertains to energy.

To be honest, I am not surprised because we have had for a very long time, sadly, in this country the culture wars when it comes to energy. How many policies did the federal Liberal government have on this? How many leaders were rolled when it came to energy policies, some of them somewhat sensible? But that did not matter for former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, just like it did not matter for many other Liberal leaders. It is sad. I thought we were getting to the end of the culture wars. I thought the federal Liberals and Liberals as a whole were embracing and understanding that renewables are the cheapest form –

David Southwick: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, I ask you to bring the member back to the bill. I know it is wonderful to talk about the opposition, but unfortunately that is not what we have in front of us today.

Lily D’Ambrosio: On the point of order, Acting Speaker, I think the greater offence is on the opposition’s side in terms of having strayed from the bill with every speaker that has got up on their side. I would suggest that that point of order is unjustified.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Paul Hamer): The debate on this bill has been very wideranging. I will allow the member to continue, and we will see what he has to say.

Jackson TAYLOR: I am always surprised when I get a point of order. I am always so measured and reasoned, and I do not go at any particular individual. I just speak the facts. We are not perfect either, right? There is always room for improvement, but I am very proud of our progressive policy agenda. I am very proud of this legislation. But the fact remains that we have for a very long time in this country had a particular political party, and not everyone in that political party, vote down and cause stagnation and send a whole range of mixed signals to the private sector, which have sent us backwards. I am grateful and thankful for not just this Allan Labor government but the federal Albanese government and people like Chris Bowen, the federal minister, who is doing a fantastic job working in concert with the fantastic Minister for Energy and Resources, because these culture wars need to end.

We need to accept the fact that renewable energy is the cheapest form of energy generation. Victoria is moving forward with our renewables plan. We are obviously supporting businesses and households to make that really important but necessary transition – a careful transition – where we support people, and we support jobs and we grow jobs through investment in renewable energy and we do not focus on nuclear pipedreams. As we have seen as well from discussions around nuclear from the federal Liberal Party, they have no detail. I do not think there are any costings, but if there are they are not detailed. The reality is that you would also have to have state governments work with a potential – hopefully not a future federal Liberal – government, and I have not heard any state government say they are willing to do so. So I am not sure where they are going with this. It would appear that some want to continue the culture wars, but this Allan Labor government want to continue to get on with reforming the sector and bringing pieces of legislation, necessary like this, to this house to continue to move us forward, to back businesses in and back households in, bring down the cost of energy and put more money back into the pockets of everyday Victorians and of small, medium and large everyday businesses and not into the pockets of multinational companies.

That is exactly what we did when we brought back the SEC. It always blows my mind when those opposite go, ‘Oh, you didn’t bring it back.’ Of course we were not able to bring it back like it was previously. We are building it back from the damage and the demolition job that those opposite did – which has been very well articulated in this place – back in the 1990s. But we have brought back the SEC. We are absolutely signing up project after project to again be a participant in the market and not run it for profit but run it for people, as it absolutely should be.

I remember when I was out knocking on doors and I was out at houses, there were people who were lineballing – ‘Who will I vote for? Jacko, you seem like a nice guy. I’m not sure, though’ – which is fair enough. That was before the moustache. I just reflected on the member for Frankston’s comment at the start. I did not get an opportunity to take up his interjection. They said to me time and time again that this policy, though they understood the SEC would be different, was what got them to vote for the Labor government. It is something that is so critical: having energy to an extent back in public hands, not to make money for consolidated revenue or for the back pockets of multinational companies but to help reduce prices – to help put money back into hardworking families’ pockets.

Whether it is the SEC, whether it is the hundreds of thousands of solar panels we put onto people’s houses, whether it is the solar hot-water systems, whether it is the solar batteries – we also have neighbourhood batteries; I remember we had a fantastic election commitment of providing neighbourhood batteries in my electorate of Bayswater in a number of suburbs – or whether it is the fantastic work that people take up through the Victorian energy upgrades program, this government is committed to helping people with the transition, but importantly it is about putting money back in their pockets. It is about listening to those market signals. It is about supporting and working in concert with the private industry on where we know the world is heading.

The world is heading to renewable energy, and Victoria is absolutely leading the pack. We are leading the charge with world-leading targets. Talking about targets, I remember I was out with the former Premier and the minister at the table, the Minister for Climate Action. We were out at EVO Power back before the election, and we were announcing Australia’s biggest renewable energy storage targets – I believe it was 2.3 gigawatts by 2030 and 6.3 gigawatts by 2035, and that is absolutely groundbreaking. That is part of this government’s huge, huge tranche of commitments, its well thought out and considered transition to renewable electricity, which we know is the cheapest form of energy. It is not culture wars, not getting stuck in perceived populism – it is about doing what is right, and what is right is supporting the Victorian people. Particularly when the cost of living is such a big issue for every single Victorian, for hardworking families out there, why would you play around with this stuff? It is a cost impost on every single household.

What this government is about is facts. It is about science, it is about progressive reform and it is about bringing down the cost of energy, and we will continue to do that each and every single day we are in this place. Point of order or otherwise, that is what this government is about. I am very happy to support this bill, and I commend it.

Kim O’KEEFFE (Shepparton) (18:24): I rise to make a contribution on the Energy and Land Legislation Amendment (Energy Safety) Bill 2025. The bill amends a variety of acts related to the energy and resources portfolio, including the Electricity Safety Act 1998, the Gas Safety Act 1997, the Pipelines Act 2005, the Land Act 1958 and the Energy Safe Victoria Act 2005. Seemingly this bill does have some positive changes, and some of the changes do make sense. However, the bill in its current form is simply pushing through amendments under a more generic bill that does not fix problems with our energy system or introduce proper accountability measures. This government’s agenda is to ban gas in this state, and this is just another step to do that.

Since coming into office just over 10 years ago, Labor has failed in the state’s transition to renewables, and because of that Victorians are continuing to pay the price.

Energy prices are going up, putting more pressure on households. And if we want facts – the previous speaker called for some facts – in June last year the Australian Energy Market Operator, the AEMO, released its 2024 integrated system plan, which laid bare the vulnerabilities in Victoria’s energy system following a decade of mismanagement under Labor. The report highlighted the critical role of gas power generation as the retirement of coal-fired power stations nears and the grid continues to transition to renewables. Labor’s opposition to gas for the past 10 years has prevented critical new supplies being brought online, and the AEMO will continue to issue warnings of potential gas shortages and blackouts. In regional Victoria we are experiencing significant blackouts. We experience the government’s lack of support for regions, and this is another neglected opportunity within this bill. Victorians deserve a government that understands the need for new natural gas supplies to be brought to market, and they simply are not getting that under this current government.

The government back in December proposed new regulations that would see the banning of gas appliances in every Victorian home, as well as banning gas connections to all new residential dwellings and most new commercial buildings. And here we have another bill supporting the banning of gas. The proposed regulations will mean that for all existing residential buildings in Victoria, gas heating and hot-water systems cannot be installed and existing gas appliances cannot be replaced with gas appliances at the end of their life.

On this side of the house we firmly oppose the government’s plan to ban gas in every home and to ban new gas appliances as replacements for existing gas appliances. We know on this side of the house that gas still has a very important role in our transition to more renewable energy. Victorian households and businesses rely on gas like those in no other state in this country. Despite this fact, Labor refuses to actively pursue policies to increase supply and to keep prices down. The government’s failure to deliver on this has forced energy prices to increase for Victorians, and this has introduced serious risks for households and businesses. As a direct result of this more and more businesses than ever are leaving Victoria to pursue their business interests elsewhere.

Victorians should be free to choose their own energy source freely. They should not be directed nor pushed in choosing their energy source by the government. The government simply cannot be trusted when it comes to the management of our energy system. After 10 years of continual policy failures it is Victorians who are paying the price and are worse off because of this government’s inability to provide affordable and reliable energy.

One of our major concerns with the bill is that it repeals the Electric Line Clearance Consultative Committee and the Victorian Electrolysis Committee, which removes expert advice. The minister stated in the second-reading speech that both of these committees ‘will no longer be required’ – so expert advice will no longer be required? Both of these committees in the past have had distinct roles and a wealth of expertise within the energy and resources portfolio. As the lead speaker the member for Brighton pointed out in his contribution, the minister obviously does not like their advice – does not like the professional advice given by the committees – and the bill is therefore abolishing them. We do not support the disbanding of these committees. Abolishing these committees removes critical industry expertise from decision-making. This shift to centralised control is not only dangerous but unacceptable, and leads to reduced transparency of decision-making.

Under the provisions Energy Safe Victoria will be given enhanced powers to identify and mitigate safety risks earlier – and there are some positive things there – to monitor compliance with regulatory requirements and take swift and decisive enforcement action where necessary. In addition the bill removes the need for Energy Safe authorised officers to obtain written consent before exercising certain powers and allows officers to request assistance from any person for the purpose of entry in exercising their powers under the relevant act. This amendment will enable authorised officers to act swiftly to resolve safety risks involving new technologies and requiring specialist knowledge. It will still be a requirement for authorised officers to report their use of entry powers to Energy Safe, which will continue to maintain a register of the entry power usage.

We do have concerns that the bill proposes significant penalty increases for electrical and plumbing contractors, with fines rising to $48,000 for individuals and $240,000 for corporations. These excessive penalties could disproportionately harm small businesses and tradies for inadvertent mistakes, and as already discussed, there are concerns around the timely addressing of appeals through VCAT. The member for Morwell, a former plumber, in his contribution raised concerns about the significant impact these fines would have on a small business that is trying to navigate significant changes while supporting households. We need to support our tradies and keep a much-needed workforce, and we need to make sure that penalties are adequate, not too extreme.

Energy Safe will also be provided with new powers to suspend electrical contractor registrations or electrical worker licensees and to issue prohibition notices to prevent certain activities. The ability to suspend contractors and workers on the spot raises concerns around the ability to appeal, with appeals only available through VCAT. Workers and contractors could be faced with prolonged uncertainty and financial hardship while waiting for the appeal to go through the VCAT process, and at a time when we need tradies on the ground. We do want to ensure safety and best practice, but we also need to have sensible penalties. Under these significant fines we are likely to lose businesses and cause significant hardship, and as the member for Narracan pointed out, penalties go from currently $820 to $48,000, which is unbelievable and totally unacceptable.

Another amendment I would like to briefly touch on is the bushfire mitigation plans. We have recently seen the devastation of the bushfires, and it has been distressful to see the communities affected by the recent bushfires across western Victoria. I acknowledge the member for Lowan’s dedication to her community during that stressful time. Under the bill the bushfire mitigation plans for specified operators would now be required every five years instead of annually. Moving from an annual to a five-year cycle for bushfire mitigation plans may reduce the regulatory burden for operators, but it does raise concerns about whether it will adequately address evolving safety risks.

The bill will also amend the Land Act 1958 with respect to unreserved Crown land. The Minister for Environment will be provided with the power to enter into an agreement to lease under section 134 of the Land Act for projects on unreserved Crown land that are subject to the Environment Effects Act 1978. By increasing certainty about future land tenure for proponents of complex projects it seeks to support further investments in environment effects statement processes and future projects’ needs.

The bill before us does not adequately or clearly define the roles of Energy Safe Victoria, WorkSafe Victoria and the Environment Protection Authority Victoria. Without clearer coordination there is a risk of duplication, inefficiency and regulatory confusion for businesses and workers. Victorians expect better from the government in regard to their energy policies. My office is inundated with many stories of local constituents whose energy bills have skyrocketed under Labor’s watch. We must do more. We must make sure that we are making energy affordable for households at a time when we know that people are struggling to make ends meet. I support the amendments put forward by the member for Brighton, but I do ask that we give much more consideration when it comes to the impact of costings. This government continues to impose extra taxes, raising the cost of living, and fails in managing energy costs.

Paul EDBROOKE (Frankston) (18:33): It is an absolute pleasure to rise and speak on the bill before us this afternoon. I have been listening very, very intensely to those opposite, and you can definitely tell the people that have some experience in a trade or a field, like the member for Morwell, but you can definitely tell people that are reading the lines given to them by the apparatchiks in their party.

I am going to start off with a little bit of myth busting. Coalition members have repeatedly on the bill before us voiced their concerns that the fine going from around $800 to over $40,000 will penalise tradies doing a good job. That is absolute rubbish. When you stuff up around electricity, you kill people – you kill families, you make fires, you kill yourself. Why do I know that? Well, I was a firefighter for a couple of years, and unfortunately I have seen it. I remember one incident at Morwell SEC, actually, when it had just closed down. We went there. We got called to a ‘man on fire’. I remember looking at the pager going, ‘Jeez, that sounds really odd. Great name for a movie, but you don’t know what you’re going to from day to day.’ This contractor had got the apprentice to fix some things with some busbars. For people who do not know what busbars are, they are high-voltage copper bars that you attach ancillary pieces of equipment to. You have them in a cabinet. It will say ‘Danger – don’t go anywhere near here’. This contractor took on a tender, and he decided not to turn the 550 volts off while this apprentice went in there and connected this.

The apprentice had to lean over the busbar, which was probably the equivalent of me leaning over these microphones, to do his work in the cabinet. He was not able to do that, and 550 volts electrocuted him. When we arrived all we could smell was pork. This poor guy had burned. He looked like Yahoo Serious, and we had no idea what was going on. At that stage, I guess as a very junior firey, I thought people gave a crap about their employees – they always had about me. When I hear people in this chamber saying, ‘Oh, we’re penalising people for doing the wrong thing and we shouldn’t be penalising them $40,000’– well, people’s lives are ruined and people can die from this. People die in house fires all the time because of dodgy electrical work, and we should be cracking down on it.

The electorate of Frankston has got a bit of a history with people talking about power and electricity and power providers. We certainly had the candidate for the Liberal Party in 2018 on the now infamous David Speers program.

A member interjected.

Paul EDBROOKE: Yes, we do not want to watch that one again. But they do watch it in some media circles to tell students of media what not to do. I remember thinking, ‘Goodness me, these people are so confused,’ and that confusion carries on here today. On that day I remember seeing the candidate trying to convince David Speers that we needed a new coal-fired power plant. David Speers said, ‘Well, you can build one,’ and the candidate said, ‘Nah, no-one will let us.’ David Speers said, ‘Who is no-one?’ and he said, ‘They,’ and it went it on like this – it was painful. I am seeing that here today with people that do not quite understand some of the things they are talking about.

We have seen people referring to committees in this bill. These are committees that have been around and that were introduced after the 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission into Black Saturday as recommendations from that royal commission. There are probably not many of us here that were around in those days. As a firefighter at that time, I certainly was, and I watched that royal commission. I was very, very intently looking at every single hearing and intently waiting for those recommendations to come out. It crosses my mind that some of these committees have done their job. Some of these committees were about increasing safety in the systems, reducing risk, mitigating the risks with powerlines, which started fires, and locking those protocols in place, so I think when you put a historical context to it, you fear not. The other thing I guess I would think about is reducing the regulatory burden for Energy Safe Victoria. Bushfire mitigation plans are another recommendation from the royal commission into Black Saturday. They are some things that I think are well utilised and well known and the protocols have been set in place for quite some time now. It is not just us asking in this chamber for this legislation to be passed, it is people in these roles asking for that regulatory burden on them to be lessened.

I did attend a really interesting forum last week. It was a political forum, and the candidates for the Dunkley federal seat and the Flinders seat in the upcoming election were there. I heard some really, really interesting opinions on where people want their power coming from. I heard some really interesting opinions on renewables and what this state government is doing, and I think there was a celebration, I would say, as far as that goes. People, especially those in the crowd at this forum, seemed to realise this state government’s commitment. Since 2014 we have had 59 projects built, providing over 4471 megawatts of new capacity, which has come online. There are nine projects currently under construction, and as we have heard today, these include the SEC’s very own project at Plumpton – one of the world’s largest battery energy storage projects in the world. But what I did hear was a very confused candidate for Dunkley, who was not Labor.

Richard Riordan: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, I was enjoying the member for Frankston’s reminiscences of elections past and elections future, but I would just draw him back to focusing on the bill rather than giving us a blow-by-blow description of his electoral experiences in Frankston over the last 10 years.

Emma Kealy interjected.

Richard Riordan: Well, I guess if he could refer to, yes, the experiences of Werribee, perhaps – but I would just bring him back to the bill at hand.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Paul Hamer): While I am enjoying the member’s contribution, if he could tie it back and bring it back to the bill.

Paul EDBROOKE: Thank you, Acting Speaker, and might I say again that you are doing a good job. I can talk about Werribee, where we won. There will be a new Labor member sitting in this area. Patience is a virtue, and I do forgive those members opposite for I guess their impatience at this stage. Some people obviously cannot bear with me; I do like to make a story.

The conversation at this forum went to what we are doing as a state. It also went to the federal Liberal opposition’s commitment to nuclear power. And at the state level it was very, very obvious that people were ready to ask a lot of questions about that – about the timeframe, about the cost – and that is something that we need to consider here today, because not one person opposite has mentioned nuclear energy today. But we did see it go from nothing to five places in Victoria and across the nation being told without any consultations that they were going to become nuclear energy hubs, the first working by 2035, which is faster than – well, that would be a faster build than anywhere in the world, including the UAE, who built their fastest build, I think it was, in 12 years. The CSIRO disagrees with all the evidence that is being brought out by the federal opposition, but we still have people at a state level talking about this as if this is going to happen, these small-to-medium reactors, when not one is working in the world. Germany is closing down their nuclear reactors. So that is why we are here today. We have to talk about renewables. We have to talk about the systems that we have got in place that we constantly need to change and monitor as new energy sources come in. We constantly need to keep up with the future and make sure that we are legislating around that safely.

Again I would say to those opposite: if you are going to deny us the pleasure of your vote on this bill, do it over something that you understand. Do it over something that makes sense; do it over something that you have read. Have a good read about these laws, because coming in here and saying that we are hurting tradies because crappy tradies when they kill someone should not be fined or should not be fined up to $40,000 is not a good premise to work from. That is a terrible premise to work from. I commend this bill to the house.

Annabelle CLEELAND (Euroa) (18:42): I rise today to speak on the Energy and Land Legislation Amendment (Energy Safety) Bill 2025. This bill makes amendments to a series of existing pieces of legislation, including the Electricity Safety Act 1998, the Gas Safety Act 1997, the Pipelines Act 2005, the Energy Safe Victoria Act 2005 and the Land Act 1958 in addition to some other minor amendments to other acts. The main purpose of this bill is seemingly to enhance powers, penalties and regulatory frameworks within Victoria’s energy sector. This includes an increase in the penalties for contractors committing offences under both the electricity and gas safety acts as well as creating greater powers to immediately suspend these workers in the case of breaches. Additional changes to the Electricity Safety Act include expanding the requirement for bushfire mitigation plans for specified operators and proposing the abolition of the Electric Line Clearance Consultative Committee and the Victorian Electrolysis Committee.

While frameworks for improving electrical safety are incredibly important, abolishing these committees is something that is difficult to comprehend. These committees offer independent expert advice, ensuring that decisions are not solely falling on the department and the minister’s office. Removing these committees from the equation brings forward significant concerns relating to the accountability, transparent reporting and checks and balances in place that can ensure safety and trust in the energy sector is improved. The increases to both enforcement powers and penalties are also significant, and there has been minimal clarification as to why these increases have been made. One point of view might be that increasing penalties and enforcement in the energy sector would help further drive this government’s crusade against gas.

This bill imposes severe penalties that could certainly be used to undermine the livelihood of any tradesperson who attempts to get in the way of this government’s ideological goals. Ultimately this government’s pursuit of this city-centric policy has failed to consider the necessary role that gas plays as an energy source for residents in regions like mine. It is without a doubt that regional Victoria will be disproportionately impacted by the short-sighted transition, particularly through high energy bills and the fallout that comes from having an already unreliable power supply. We know that many of our regional communities are still only fitted with gas options for heating, cooking and their water. Removing gas options in these houses will only put further pressure on our electricity supply, which has regularly crumbled under the slightest bit of pressure in recent years.

I am all for the responsible transition to renewables, but how are our already struggling communities meant to survive when there are no alternatives? The financial impact on our households and businesses will be severe. Energy bills are already through the roof and further mismanagement of our energy supply will only hurt the pockets of people in our towns even more. These bill increases have significantly impacted our regional communities too, and far more than those residents in the city. A recent default tariff for AusNet, which services mostly regional areas in the east of Victoria, was $1902 for a residential household and $4388 for businesses. Meanwhile, the CitiPower tariff for metro Melbourne was just $1456 for households and $3025 for businesses. My office is contacted every week by people concerned about the impact these rising tariffs, rates and bills have on their ability to live their lives and continue operating their businesses. Our towns are crying out for some relief, but under this government the cost of living is getting so much more expensive. This will only get much worse when removing gas supply in our regional communities.

After power outages left much of the region without electricity last year, AusNet research found that electricity-only households were saddled with significantly higher costs than those that had gas connections as well. Electricity-only customers spent on average $1100 to respond to an outage, but those that had gas connections too? That was reduced to just $360. Towns like Benalla, Euroa, Longwood, Violet Town, Ruffy, Nagambie and Strathbogie are all continuing to deal with regular outages, making those figures really, really concerning during a cost-of-living crisis. These outages extend beyond bad weather and can be tracked back to issues to energy supply itself. There have been outages when it is cold, outages when it is hot, outages when it is dry, outages when it is wet, windy, calm and still. In absolutely all weather conditions we have had outages directly relating to local electricity supply.

Many of the issues in my region are due to there being a single line of power running from Benalla to Violet Town, through to Euroa and spreading out across the surrounding region, traversing 1200 kilometres of powerlines running off the longest feeder line in the state. It is pleasing to hear that a $22 million project to install a second powerline in the region is currently awaiting approval with the Australian Energy Regulator, and that some changes to the current switches are set for the near future. Despite this promising proposal, construction would likely be years away.

Just last week I held meetings with representatives from AusNet to discuss the ongoing concerns over power reliability in my region. Meetings like this have unfortunately become far too frequent, with this most recent meeting following outages the week prior that impacted 2500 households in the wider Benalla region. These unplanned outages follow several similar incidents in Euroa, Violet Town, Longwood and Nagambie in recent weeks and have left local businesses and homes so worried, and they are just buckling under the financial pressure.

While a series of upgrades have been implemented, there are still too many days where our towns are left with absolutely no power. It is incredibly frustrating for everyone that is affected by the outages and it is imperative that improvements continue to happen. Too many households and businesses in our region have suffered due to these regular and prolonged outages. People have been left unable to contact loved ones, unable to operate electric medical equipment and unable to keep their homes at an appropriate temperature during extreme weather.

Businesses have had to close. They have lost considerable stock as refrigerators are left without power and have been forced into purchasing expensive generators just to operate.

While this bill aims to make changes to our energy sector, issues remain with the execution. A lack of clarity, excessive penalties and potential overreach make this bill difficult to condone. Some amendments to the legislation have been proposed. Ideally they would make this bill much more appropriate and ensure this government was more transparent. That would be nice, wouldn’t it? This includes addressing the issue of statutorily protected consultative committees, specifically the Electric Line Clearance Consultative Committee and the Victorian Energy Safety Commission. This amendment would prevent the disbandment of these committees, ensuring the status quo is maintained. We strongly oppose the government’s continued attack on independent expert advice. We like transparency. In particular the government’s conflict with the ELCCC, which has provided advice the minister disagrees with, is concerning. The first amendment aims to preserve these committees and their statutory foundation.

The second proposed amendment addresses the government’s intentions to alter Energy Safe Victoria’s requirement to table an annual corporate plan, instead allowing it to be done every three years with updates provided annually to the minister and Treasurer. We believe the Energy Safe Victoria corporate plan in this bill should still be published, with annual updates in between also made public to ensure greater transparency – that word again that we love on this side of the house and it seems the government does not.

The last amendment addresses the bill’s power to enter into an agreement to lease unreserved Crown land that is subject to the Environment Effects Act 1978 for projects under section 134 of the Land Act 1958. This amendment includes seeking to improve transparency by adding a requirement to publish details of this prior to granting such a lease, including the value of the access to the public land, the basis of calculation and the value of the signed lease. All three of these amendments would make this bill a more considered and reasonable piece of legislation. If this bill remains as is, this is not something that we can support.

Anthony CIANFLONE (Pascoe Vale) (18:52): I rise to support the Energy and Land Legislation Amendment (Energy Safety) Bill 2025. In doing so I would like to acknowledge the Minister for the State Electricity Commission, Minister for Energy and Resources and Minister for Climate Action for her work in bringing this bill to the chamber. I acknowledge that she is a former student many years ago of Mercy College in my electorate, which celebrates its 60th anniversary this week. It is fantastic to see a former student of Mercy here in this state Parliament as the member for Mill Park spearheading the renewable energy drive in this state, fantastic.

This bill forms another important part of supporting our Labor government’s nation-leading agenda to transition our energy grid to a more renewable, more sustainable and cheaper network for businesses, households and communities. Fundamental to achieving this aspiration will be safety – safety for the workers building this infrastructure and safety for the households and the communities in which this infrastructure will be built and through which it will be transmitted and the properties through which it will be hosted. The fact is the provision of an essential service like energy cannot occur without appropriate regard to safety, and that is what this bill is so important.

The reforms it introduces will have those long-term benefits for the safety of Victorians and ensure consumer protections and confidence in our energy safety regulator, Energy Safe Victoria. The bill will amend a number of acts, including the Electricity Safety Act 1998, the Gas Safety Act 1997, the Pipelines Act 2005 and the Energy Safe Victoria Act 2005, to strengthen Victoria’s energy safety framework. The bill will also amend the Land Act 1958 to provide improved certainty when investing in complex projects on unreserved land in Victoria.

Victoria’s energy sector is undergoing a rapid transformation under this minister, driven by the growth of both utility-scale and residential generation and storage. By bringing back the SEC we are working towards creating 59,000 new clean energy jobs over the coming years and meeting our carbon reduction targets of 33 per cent by 2025, 50 per cent by 2030, 80 per cent by 2035 and net zero emissions by 2045. Along with that we have invested already $3 billion into renewable energy infrastructure. We have set forward some of the most ambitious renewable energy targets in the nation and the world, with a 65 per cent renewable electricity target by 2030 and 95 per cent renewable electricity by 2035, and we are investing in large-scale public projects for the first time in many years, like the SEC renewable energy park in Horsham and the Melbourne renewable energy hub in Melton.

The fact is we are taking that real action to reach these goals and at the same time we have driven down our emissions by 32.3 per cent.

We have grown the share of energy generation that comes from renewables to almost 40 per cent of the state’s energy generation, and at the same time we have grown the economy and grown jobs by 42.8 per cent.

At the same time these actions have also helped us keep downward pressure on energy prices. Through these measures Victoria now has the lowest wholesale power price in the country. This is due to our record investment in cheaper, more reliable renewable energy. Lower wholesale prices mean lower retail bills for Victorian households and businesses. The 2024–25 Victorian default energy offer also shows an average of $100 or around a 6 per cent decrease in electricity bills for residential customers versus the previous year. For small businesses it is around $261, or a 7 per cent decrease. That is real money back in the pockets of Victorian families and Victorian businesses. In stark contrast, it is the opposition here that are focused on the most expensive forms of energy as their alternative policy, whether it is gas or nuclear. The fact is renewable, clean energy is the cheapest form of energy.

As we undertake this transformation we need to make sure that legislation does keep pace. Victoria’s energy safety framework was designed for a centralised fossil fuel-based network and has not kept pace with these evolving technologies, creating regulatory gaps. That legislative reform is required to respond to those contemporary safety risks. The bill will amend the Electricity Safety Act 1998, the Gas Safety Act 1997 and the Pipelines Act 2005 to strengthen energy safety and stability, to mitigate safety issues early, to monitor compliance with directions and take enforcement actions. It introduces a new entry power with a warrant where there is a risk to the health and safety of a person or of significant damage to property that does not amount to an emergency. The bill also enables the Electricity Safety Act and Gas Safety Act to be enforced by infringement notices, providing additional flexibility. There are quite a number of other reforms contained here as well, which given the time I have, I might just acknowledge that previous speakers have contributed on. The bill is based on extensive consultation with unions, the business sector and various other stakeholders, who by and large support overwhelmingly – unlike the opposition – the amendments contained in this bill.

The safe rollout of more renewable solar, cheaper energy across Victoria also has benefits for my community of Merri-bek in Pascoe Vale, Coburg and Brunswick West. As the Minister for the State Electricity Commission announced over the weekend, Victorians continue to save and take up renewable energy in record droves. Our Solar Homes program has helped slash $1 billion off the installation of solar panels, energy-efficient heat pumps and batteries, with 30 per cent of Victorian homes now having installed solar. More than 300,000 solar panels have been installed through the landmark Solar Homes program, and that is generating 2100 megawatts of solar power from rooftops, the equivalent of Loy Yang A, one of the largest coal-fired power stations in Victoria. Last year was a record for Solar Homes, with more than 78,000 solar panels, hot-water systems and batteries installed during 2024 – the largest year on record. Combined with the Victorian energy upgrades program, the VEU, which is providing a discount on energy-efficient appliances ranging from cooktops to heat pumps, Victorians are collectively saving a further $440 million.

In my community and my electorate we have had a very strong uptake of installations via the Solar Homes program – 2460 solar homes installations. One of those homes that very much set the pace locally when it comes to renewable and cheaper energy is that of Katy Daily in Coburg. Minister D’Ambrosio and I visited Katie’s wonderful home in Coburg back in October 2023, with Katie having installed solar panels, a solar hot-water system, insulation and double-glazed windows back in 2021. When we talk about the Solar Homes program and how it can benefit and save households money, we need to look no further than Katy, because she has not paid a power bill since upgrading her house – zero-dollar power bills. That is Katy in Coburg. I thank Katy for having hosted us in her beautiful home and commend her for her broader ongoing local environmental advocacy that she undertakes.

Building on the incredible efforts of people like Katy, I am also very pleased to have announced we have secured Merri-bek as one of the first LGAs to welcome the rollout of the new SEC consumer pilot. The pilot is very much the next step in delivering that one-stop shop for local consumers wanting to switch to all-electric. The SEC pilot in Merri-bek will include a free digital platform that walks you through a short survey about your home and energy use, then tailors a plan to cut your energy bill through electrification. The pilot includes suggestions for locals on suitable appliances, indicative costs, return on investment, government rebates, emission reductions and much more. That is support, advice and assistance that people may need to transition. Regardless of their background or their income, the SEC pilot will be there to help people across Merri-bek.

All of these measures stand in very stark contrast to those of the Liberal–Nationals, who oppose this bill. When it comes to energy, the Liberals can tell you all about what they oppose and stand against but not what they stand for. Whether it is this bill or whether it is the solar power program, wind generation or bringing back the SEC, make no mistake, the Liberals will seek to cut all of our renewable projects, and they will sell off the SEC again. While they claim to be critical – (Time expired)

Business interrupted under sessional orders.