Wednesday, 17 August 2022

Bills

Planning and Environment Amendment (Wake Up to Climate Change) Bill 2022

Second reading

Debate resumed on motion of Mr HAYES:

That the bill be now read a second time.

Ms TERPSTRA (Eastern Metropolitan) (15:28): I rise to make a contribution on this bill which has been brought to the house by Mr Hayes. I welcome Mr Hayes’s interest in climate change and acknowledge his desire to amend the Planning and Environment Act 1987. As we know, planning and climate change are two topics that are on many, many people’s minds—maybe planning not as many, maybe some in different areas. But certainly climate change is something that this government takes very seriously, and we have taken very strong and strident action in regard to this. You have just got to look at the government’s Solar Homes program and lots of different aspects. We have done lots of work on recycling, the circular economy and all those sorts of things which are going to help climate change. But in this instance the amendments to the Planning and Environment Act are not required to enable the government to take stronger action on climate change.

There has never been a Victorian government more focused on emissions reduction and building resilience to a changing climate than the Andrews government. Victoria already has a strong legal framework in place to manage climate change. The Climate Change Act 2017 provides Victoria with the legislative foundation to manage climate change risks, to maximise the opportunities that arise from decisive action and to drive our transition to a climate-resilient community and economy.

Furthermore, as there has been no engagement with industry or government in the development of this bill I am concerned about the potential for unseen consequences for private sector investment and the state’s pipeline of housing and major infrastructure projects. As you know, we have got a very strong and visually obvious record in terms of our Big Housing Build, for example. We are building lots of affordable homes for lots of people, so we would be concerned about this bill if it was to be given safe passage through this house. As I said, it is something that will have consequences for the private sector and our pipeline of housing and major infrastructure projects.

I am pleased to be able to note the extensive activity that is occurring within planning and across government to reduce emissions and to respond to our changing climate. In terms of targets, the Victorian government has legislated for net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, and this target has been set through Victoria’s Climate Change Act 2017. We are consulting on the 2035 target, which will be settled by April 2023. Victoria’s climate change strategy outlines the Victorian government’s initiatives to meet the legislative emission reduction targets along with key principles to guide action on climate change adaption. This strategy promotes a combination of responses, including programs to transition our electricity system to renewable energy and transitioning to zero-emissions vehicles. Change will be supported by investments, new standards, incentives and guidance and will use the best available climate change data in decision-making.

Planning has an important role to play in reducing emissions and responding to climate change—from planning policies that facilitate renewable energy to important updates of planning and building standards to ensure that planning assists us to transition to a more sustainable future. One of the things we looked at in our recent ecosystem inquiry was the impact that some planning decisions can have on our ecosystems—for example, the heat island effect. We are finding with some new land and housing developments—and this is also certainly the case in New South Wales—that where a lot of houses are built with black roofs, for example, if there are not a lot of trees this can create a heat island effect, which means there is a noticeable increase in temperature on the ground in some of those municipalities or areas. That is something to be concerned about, so planning absolutely does have an impact in regard to climate.

The Minister for Planning is the decision-maker for energy projects over 1 megawatt. Since the Andrews government took office in 2014 the Minister for Planning has approved a total of 16 085 megawatts of renewable energy projects and large-scale batteries. This includes 15 new wind farms, 35 solar farms and nine large-scale batteries. The wind and solar farm approvals will provide enough energy to power approximately 9.52 million homes. Approving these projects has reduced emissions, created jobs and established a diverse regional economy as well. The rapid take-up of rooftop solar highlights the willingness of Victorians to adapt to renewable energy technology to take charge of their power bills and create a better future. To support home owners doing their bit, planning changes have made it easier to install neighbourhood batteries on Victoria’s electricity distribution network. I know in my own region, the Eastern Metropolitan Region, I have had a number of inquiries from local constituents who want to know more about community batteries or neighbourhood batteries and also people wanting to know more about how they can access the government’s Solar Homes program to get solar panels on their roofs. It just shows me that the level of community interest in this area is really quite strong.

Neighbourhood batteries enable the network to support more rooftop solar by storing solar-generated electricity during the day and discharging it during the evenings when demand is highest. This enables consumers to generate and consume more renewable energy locally and further supports Victoria’s emissions reductions and renewable energy targets. The Victorian government’s $10.92 million neighbourhood battery initiative is providing grants to fund pilots and demonstrations of a range of neighbourhood-scale battery ownership and operational models to unlock the role that neighbourhood-scale batteries can play in Victoria’s transitioning electricity system. We are also clarifying standards relating to the overshadowing of rooftop solar systems to strike the right balance between encouraging more rooftop solar and the needs of growing suburbs.

I can say on a personal level we just upgraded the solar panels on our roof, and we were talking to the installer about virtual power plants and how those things work and how you can even share solar with more localised people in your street. So there is continuing evolution of technology and opportunities for people to generate solar and to share it locally. As I said earlier, it is generating lots of interest locally, and the number of Victorians that are taking this up demonstrates that point.

In January 2021 the government released the ESD road map, or the Environmentally Sustainable Development of Buildings and Subdivisions: A Roadmap for Victoria’s Planning System. The ESD road map sets out an agenda for the planning system to fulfil Plan Melbourne commitments. This includes a range of planning policy measures to support renewable energy, save energy and respond to a changing climate. Stage 1 of this work was completed in June 2022 with the approval of amendment VC216. Amendment VC216 introduced comprehensive changes to strengthen planning policy responses to environmentally sustainable development and amend the purpose of the Victorian planning provisions to specifically include consideration of climate change. This change provides a clear signal that the planning system has a key role in supporting government action on climate change. Stage 2 of this work is underway and involves preparation of new and updated planning standards to support climate change adaption and mitigation. These standards will support energy efficiency through improved passive solar design, onsite renewable energy generation, active and sustainable transport, waste and recycling, integrated water management, cooling and greening, and measures to reduce air and noise pollution exposure. Minimum electric vehicle charging standards for new buildings are also being developed.

The National Construction Code has also had significant work undertaken on it, and buildings now constructed will be with us well into the future. Important improvements to the energy efficiency performance of residential dwellings are being considered through changes to Australia’s National Construction Code. These changes would introduce 7-star national home energy rating scheme requirements and a whole-of-home energy budget for residential dwellings. If approved nationally by Australia’s building ministers, these changes will support climate change and net zero goals, provide benefits to consumers through a reduction in energy bills and network charges and also improve occupant health and comfort. Electric vehicle readiness for residential and commercial buildings is also incorporated into the proposed updates to the code. I look forward to the building ministers meeting coming up later this month, where other state and territory building ministers will consider the final proposal for these changes. As the energy minister has previously indicated, Victoria stands ready to go it alone and implement these changes if they are not supported by other states and territories, as we feel confident that the preparatory work that has been done in Victoria will allow us to forge ahead.

In regard to climate adaption, long-term records show that Victoria’s climate is changing due to global warming. Since 1910 Victoria has warmed by 1.2 degrees Celsius. Victoria has already experienced reduced average rainfall, especially in cooler months; an increase in frequency of extreme heat events; and an increase in dangerous fire weather and the length of the bushfire season. Planning has a critical role in ensuring Victoria’s communities are prepared for a changing climate. That is why the climate change act requires adaption action plans to be prepared by the relevant minister and renewed every five years to make sure they remain current and up to date.

The built environment adaption action plan was released in April 2022. It is one of seven adaption action plans that are required by legislation and guided by Victoria’s climate change strategy. The action plan includes a five-year strategy to enhance the resilience of our cities and towns to deal with the elevated impacts arising from climate change. It identifies 19 actions for the Victorian government, including staged updates to planning and building standards to address the elevated risks associated with flood, fire, heatwaves, drought and erosion. As we know, these types of events, which we used to experience less frequently, are something that we are all experiencing much more frequently. Other important commitments include taking a whole-of-government approach to harness economic, financial and legal tools to support the state’s long-term adaption needs.

Outside the planning portfolio, there is still a power of work being undertaken as well. The Andrews Labor government has implemented a range of other government initiatives that continue to deliver on climate change for all Victorians. I have mentioned some of these before, and will I just quickly go through some of them again. The Solar Homes program has supported over 200 000 households to install photovoltaic panels, solar hot water systems, heat pump hot water systems or batteries at their home.

I can say that when the battery program was first announced—it was looked at on a postcode basis—Templestowe in my region, in the Eastern Metropolitan Region, was one of the postcodes that was selected in order for residents to be considered to have a battery installed at their home. It was very successful. I had a number of constituents contact my office who indicated their positive experience with the program and how pleased they were with their reduction in energy bills and also the fact that they could store the electricity that they had generated in their battery. The program now assists both owner-occupied and rental households to install solar PV systems or battery storage systems, including residents living in apartment buildings.

The zero-emissions vehicle road map will invest in the rollout of public and fleet charging infrastructure across the state so that all Victorians can be part of this transformation. We know that we need the infrastructure to support zero-emissions vehicles. We are going to need to have more charging stations, and that will definitely help with the uptake of zero-emissions vehicles, because of course people want access to charging stations. I know there are some in Melbourne, but we need more. There are some, for example, at Woolworths in Heidelberg. They have charging stations in their basement, in their undercroft parking, which of course is very helpful and useful and available for people to use when they want to charge their vehicles. So that is a very welcome development. But we need to do more. We need to make sure that the charging infrastructure is there across the state and accessible for people to use.

We are also establishing six renewable energy zones to target investment towards strengthening the network in Victoria to enable an orderly and coordinated transition to renewable energies, and we will engage with local communities to ensure that they benefit from these renewable energy zones. The commitment of $540 million in funding to progress the development of the six zones will build a next-generation power grid to connect the world-class renewable energy resources across our state in a way that ensures Victorians continue to have access to affordable and reliable power, ensures regional development and job opportunities are maximised and ensures any adverse impacts are minimised. The government has established a new body, VicGrid, to work with traditional owners, investors, stakeholders and local communities to plan and develop the renewable energy zones in a strategic and consultative manner. Again, this is all preparatory work to enable us to support a greater transition and movement towards renewable energy.

The Latrobe Valley energy and growth program is supporting community and industry projects that increase the uptake of renewable energy generation and management and storage technologies, back the creation of local jobs and reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the Latrobe Valley region. The program provides up to $3 million in grants to fund both industry and community-led projects across the local government areas of Latrobe City, Baw Baw and Wellington.

We have a commitment to a 2032 offshore wind target for Victoria of at least 2 gigawatts and long-term targets to reach 4 gigawatts of offshore wind capacity by 2035 and 9 gigawatts by 2040. These are really exciting projects—the offshore wind targets. For example, we have got the Star of the South off the coast of Gippsland, which is a very exciting project. We learned a lot about that project when we undertook the renewable energy inquiry. I cannot wait to see that project go from strength to strength, because it is a really important project and just makes sense. I think in Australia and certainly in the Bass Strait we have got one of the windiest places in the world, and it only makes sense to harness and maximise those natural assets that we can use, especially when we want to create renewable energy.

We are supporting the design and delivery of the Hume Hydrogen Highway between Melbourne and Sydney. This includes supporting at least four refuelling stations and approximately 25 hydrogen-powered long-haul heavy freight vehicles to adopt zero-emission technology such as fuel cells. Victoria’s hydrogen legal frameworks review, as part of a nationally coordinated working group, is reviewing our regulatory frameworks to better support hydrogen industry development and safety. This work delivers on a key action of Australia’s National Hydrogen Strategy.

We are supporting the Greening the West initiative to plant 500 000 new trees in growth areas across six councils. I know this has been really super popular in the western suburbs of Melbourne, because there was concern around not having enough trees. We know that not only do trees provide shade but they also help air quality as well. So it is really important if we want to do something about cleaner air that trees are part of that—not to mention other measures in terms of reducing air pollution. But we know that planting these trees in growth areas across six councils will provide more shade and green spaces. This is part of realising the goals of Plan Melbourne by greening and cooling our city. As the western suburbs can experience some of the worst urban heat island impacts, and I talked about that earlier, across metropolitan Melbourne during summer, this is a really great initiative.

There is a commitment for Victoria’s 18 water corporations to reach net zero emissions by 2035. This will make Victoria’s water sector the first in Australia to commit to net zero emissions by 2035. The $20 million New Energy Jobs Fund supports Victorian-based projects that create long-term sustainable jobs and increase the uptake of renewable energy generation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and drive innovation in new energy technologies. The fund is a key component of the $200 million Future Industries Fund to support high-growth, high-value industries, such as the new energy technology sector, that are critical to securing Victoria’s future as a competitive, innovative and outward-looking economy.

The Post 2025 Distributed Energy Resources Implementation Plan—wow, that it is a really long title, a mouthful; I think I managed not to mangle it—brings together market bodies and other key stakeholders to ensure technical requirements, market changes, system needs, consumer protections and governance frameworks are all in place to effectively integrate the distributed energy resources implementation plan in the future energy market.

Before I go on to my concluding remarks, I want to say something about what I have been talking to young school leavers in my region about. As members know, a lot of young people are interested in climate change and want to play their part in helping to reduce emissions. But what I have noticed is that a lot of school leavers are really interested in working in the renewable sector. We have seen this particularly with school leavers who are quite interested in working in the electrical field. That can be in solar and rooftop solar installations and also as auto technicians in the field of zero-emissions vehicles. Just recently I was with the Minister for Environment and Climate Action, Lily D’Ambrosio, and we visited a solar manufacturer in my region down in Bayswater North. It was a really fantastic operation. They are an electrical business and they install solar panels, but they also employ two wonderful apprentices, both young women—

A member interjected.

Ms TERPSTRA: very cool—who are in the first year of their apprenticeships as electricians, and they are absolutely loving their job. The company is also led by a fantastic woman. Looking at how they are really embracing not only helping Victorians get solar on their rooftops but driving that need to get more women into the industry, into solar, and also encouraging younger women into apprenticeships, this is the really important part about the role that TAFE plays in supporting the skills and training agenda, which is a very important part of this government’s agenda and how we have saved TAFE. We brought TAFE back from the brink of destruction thanks to those opposite.

We are seeing strong demand for skills and training and for people wanting to go to TAFE. Of course we have our free TAFE initiative, which is supporting a lot of this. For example, some kids, if they are interested in going to TAFE, can do their certificate II. They can get that off the free TAFE list, so that is a saving to them and that also helps with cost-of-living pressures for young people. If you are going to get your Ls you can now get them for free, but if you are an apprentice already and you have your drivers licence, you get a discount off your licence as well, so there is strong support for apprentices coming into the solar industry. Like I said, there are a lot of school leavers who are showing a lot of interest because they feel like they are actively playing a part in helping to reduce emissions. It is really important to see that TAFE is playing such an important part in this journey.

Likewise we are seeing a lot of younger women expressing interest in working on zero-emissions vehicles, because the old bangers of the day which probably Mr Tarlamis and I would have driven when we were growing up were gas guzzlers, and I am sure you, Acting President Bourman, would have driven them—and you too, Mr Hayes. I think everyone in here would have driven some vehicles that were really dirty vehicles in terms of their emissions back in the day. Probably most of the young folk that may be watching at home and listening to this contribution would not know what a V8 engine is; they may only be seen at Bathurst these days. But I remember driving a V8—Mr Tarlamis is nodding his head. Whilst they were very fun to drive, jeez did they use a lot of petrol, and there were lots of emissions everywhere. Those are things that just live on in our memories now, sadly and unfortunately, when it comes to vehicles because vehicles do create a lot of emissions—not only cars but also trucks and the like, and we know that a lot of people use diesel vehicles as well. So there is still a lot of work to be done in the zero-emissions vehicle space.

As I said, it is really heartening to see a lot of interest from young women who want to become apprentices, to work in this space and to work on the new zero-emissions vehicles, because we do need that and we need to continue to develop the technology and to have technology continue to evolve. I know in Europe there is work being done on the manufacture of zero-emissions trucks, for example. That is something that would be really great to see in Australia, but of course our manufacturing industry in terms of vehicles was decimated by the Morrison government, and sadly we do not have that anymore. But we are presented with an opportunity now, with the growth of zero-emissions vehicles, to actually have that come back to Australia through appropriate investment and the like.

It was really good to see, for example, the manufacturing down at Geelong of the wind turbines that are being used on wind farms. That is being done locally here in Victoria. Again, we need to support industries that are going to be upstream or downstream or secondary, as they call it. It is just like it used to happen in manufacturing with vehicles: you would have parts, you would have all sorts of upstream and downstream industries from manufacturing, and likewise we can have that here in Australia again, hopefully, now that we have got a different federal government who actually cares about manufacturing and climate change. As you know, the last federal government did not care about anything, and we learned today that former Prime Minister Scott Morrison seemed to have a number of portfolios that no-one knew about. It was a bit of a secret. Even his own cabinet ministers did not know how many—perhaps they were shadows of shadows that they did not know about. But here we are. Scott Morrison seemed to have a number of portfolios under his belt. We know they did not care about climate change, we know they did not care about jobs and we know they really did nothing to support all of the things that I have mentioned in my speech—even things like recycling, renewable energy and the circular economy policy reducing waste. All of those things were lost opportunities under the federal government when they were in government, because they did nothing.

That is why Victoria has taken stronger action on many of these things, because we recognised that we cannot waste any more time. We were losing time. There is no time to waste in getting on and making sure we transition to renewable energy. We started out, like I said, with the rooftop solar program, and that program has gone from strength to strength. So the appetite is there. Victorians know and understand why this is so important. Victorians know and understand that in order to reduce emissions we have got to make a number of changes. We just cannot mess around anymore.

Like we learned in the ecosystem inquiry, we see the ongoing impacts of climate change in nature every day. We see, like I said earlier, more severe weather events happening more often. We see the impact on our waterways. We see the impact on our forests, on our land, on our native animals. We see that when things get out of balance it affects all ecosystems. We do not want to see any more native animals—even lizards, skinks and those sorts of things—continue to be added to the endangered species list. Climate change is I think the single biggest threat to native species in terms of them being threatened, so we know that this is critically important.

Whilst I have talked about the rubric which is climate change, like I said, TAFE and skills and training are an important part of that agenda as well, because we know we need them to support the jobs that are going to be created. Some of the jobs that will be created out of these transitions do not exist now. That is kind of the exciting thing when we talk to young people about climate change—that some of the jobs that we knew about in the past and know of will not be there but will be replaced by different jobs. There is the ability to create new technologies through our investment in STEM, especially for students who want to go into science, technology, engineering, arts and maths—I know they always leave the ‘A’ out of STEAM, but I always fly that flag for the ‘A’ for arts. If we keep supporting students and women to express an interest and be involved in STEM, we know that we are going to get really good advances in technology, like I said. So if we have a training and skills network that is able to support people to continue to improve on the technology that is there, we can have a local manufacturing industry here in Australia and we can continue to make strides and inroads into reducing the impacts of climate change, so it is really, really important.

Just in conclusion, Victoria does have a wideranging approach to climate change strategy and emissions reductions. You can see, just by all the various elements that I have laid out during my contribution today, it really is a whole-of-government approach. It is a thorough and comprehensive review of a range of things that will help get us to where we need to be. We have legislated targets that set the climate change strategy. We have developed and are continuing to develop robust frameworks, legislative changes and action plans to ensure we are getting on with reducing emissions and responding to climate change. Collectively these measures outline the significant work that the Andrews Labor government is doing and will continue to do to ensure that Victoria will protect its natural environment and be responsive and adaptive to climate change.

Therefore it is clear, given the extensive progress and processes that our government is undertaking and the progress it is making and the concern that I have highlighted of the potential unintended consequences this bill could have without being properly tested with industry or government, that amending the Planning and Environment Act as outlined in the proposed bill is unnecessary at this time. Again, one of the things that we know being in government here is whenever we enact legislation we undertake extensive consultation with many stakeholders, and in this case whether it is industry, business—whoever it is—the consultation needs to happen and it needs to happen in depth and at length. As I said, that has not happened in regard to this bill, so if the Planning and Environment Act was amended as proposed it could have severe unintended consequences, and that is something we really need to protect against. I will conclude my remarks there.

Sitting suspended 3.57 pm until 4.19 pm.

Mr DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan—Leader of the Opposition) (16:19): I am pleased to rise and make a contribution to the Planning and Environment Amendment (Wake Up to Climate Change) Bill 2022, brought to this chamber by Mr Hayes. I indicate in the first instance that we understand that Mr Hayes is sincerely trying to grapple with and address some of these issues, and we are respectful of that; however, I do need to say in this case I do not think he has come to grips with what is actually required. And I think that the government has probably formed a similar view that, whatever its intent, this bill does not really get there.

The issues with climate change are by now very well known by the chamber. We obviously have a statewide target legislated for 2050—a statewide target which has been put into place but not legislated. The coalition has recently indicated that we will legislate the target for 2030 at 50 per cent. We have also indicated that we are very keen to make sure that we align as much as we can with New South Wales, bringing the two large economies together to the extent that we can with many of the targets and many of the broader objectives. These are objectives that are held by most Victorians, and Victorians are aware of the challenge that we face. That is why the coalition has recently released its package, which has a balanced way forward. We have a commitment to hydrogen with $1 billion of support for hydrogen, and certainly the government speaker just now talked about a number of hydrogen projects. Victoria is lagging nationally with respect to hydrogen, and we will certainly be supportive of hydrogen through the allocation of $1 billion to push that agenda forward. We have also said that there is actually a continuing role for gas as a transition fuel. It is clear that we need stability and a network that is able to be relied upon. We have certainly said that there is an ongoing role for onshore gas exploration and further gas into the system with a domestic reservation policy to make sure that gas is in part reserved for users domestically.

We also have, importantly, I think, a focus—and this is partly Mr Hayes’s focus too—on tree canopy. We see the significance of greening the city and reforesting the city and many other areas of the state, but in particular our urban areas, as the truth of the matter is that as you chop down canopy, you build dense buildings and you build with concrete, steel, brick and asphalt, you actually end up with a hotter suburb and a hotter area, especially where so much tree canopy has been displaced. The work to increase tree canopy in the west of the city of Melbourne is a very significant task. It needs to be pushed as quickly as possible. But all over Melbourne the truth is we are losing tree canopy, and that is true in my area of Southern Metro—in Boroondara and Stonnington and Whitehorse and Bayside and Kingston. All of these municipalities are facing a very significant chipping away at the canopy both on private land and indeed, outrageously, on public land. We need to address this. Mr Hayes certainly had a motion for an inquiry into planning provisions, which we supported. I should note for the record that I wrote to that inquiry and sought to expand and sharpen the terms of reference with concurrent consideration of tree-canopy issues and indeed a series of heritage matters. That was for additional terms of reference to be done concurrently, and it was framed in such a way that we would have had a lot of input from municipal planners and others. I think that this was one of the more important aspects that should have been considered. Sadly it was rejected by the committee, and I think that was a significant mistake. I record now my disappointment in that significant matter.

I should say on the loss of tree canopy, in particular on public land, that there have been absolutely devastating impacts from government working in a thoughtless and outrageous way over the last eight years. We have seen transport projects, for example, constructed and put forward in such a way that maximum damage has been done to tree canopy—old, established trees torn down. I think with horror of the behaviour of the Level Crossing Removal Project on the sky rail corridor—taking out more than 1000 established trees in a very short period and, in an Orwellian twist, releasing their tree-retention policy the week after the cull. This was clear-felling in the city in established suburbs. You can go to areas like Noble Park, where there is inadequate tree canopy—and I see Mr Tarlamis listening as I say this. He will know those great and wonderful red gums that were there, which are no longer in existence, in that pocket near the station. Those sorts of decisions—thoughtless decisions, decisions made by bureaucrats who do not have a deeper or broader understanding—are the sorts of decisions that have got to be dealt with by proper mechanisms. It could have been done quite differently. It could have been done in a way that did not destroy every single tree in that corridor. They could have actually retained many of the trees. They could have done so.

Mr Tarlamis interjected.

Mr DAVIS: Yes, you know those large trees. That was a tragedy.

Mr Tarlamis interjected.

Mr DAVIS: I know. That is why I picked Noble Park, Mr Tarlamis, because I thought you may respond. But you actually understand the point I am making. It is a tremendous loss. That canopy is important, and the importance of trees, as was said earlier in my contribution, and the contribution of trees is, I think, very significant to our city. We need a very close focus on bringing large numbers of trees back into our areas. The Big Build has been undertaken in a way that has done maximum damage—not minimum damage but maximum damage—to the city, and I think people will look back in years to come with horror at the way that these things have been undertaken.

Further, in our policy announced a few weeks ago we made very clear provisions, as I say, for a transition with gas, but we have been very clear too that there is a close involvement for electric vehicles. We have got to have more support for those to be brought forward. We need to, beyond that, as I said, focus on hydrogen, and we need to be taking steps to enhance our infrastructure with respect to electricity coming to the city. Solar and other electric generation—including wind in the ocean, offshore—need transmission lines to get to the city, and there needs to be a clear policy to do that. The state government has floundered on this. I am not pretending this is an easy part of the equation, but the building of an established and solid network to provide reliable inputs of renewable energy—solar, hydro and wind—is a very important part of the equation.

But this bill does not get there, sadly. I just note that Mr Hayes’s attempts here have been, as I say, sincere. The issues with this, I think, are pretty clear. One of my notes here says most of the projects under the Big Build, which were referenced in the second reading, have their own respective legislation that circumvents the Planning and Environment Act 1987. Amending the Planning and Environment Act would be a pointless exercise. Strengthening this act will not stop the problem with those projects. You have actually got to deal with this on a broader front than is proposed by Mr Hayes in his bill. The bill appears to focus on developers and individuals for their impacts on climate change, but it does not deal with so many other aspects. We are certainly aware of the government’s view on this, and it has been strongly communicated to us by bureaucrats. There are many things that we disagree with the current government on, but on this matter we have the same view: we think this bill does not get there.

Dr RATNAM (Northern Metropolitan) (16:30): It is a pleasure to rise to speak to the Planning and Environment Amendment (Wake Up to Climate Change) Bill 2022 that Mr Hayes has put before this chamber, one that is long overdue and I hope sparks a conversation about how we need to urgently act on reforms in this area, as has been presented in this bill. We have an opportunity to support reforms that will have a material impact on improving biodiversity, broader environmental and broader planning outcomes across neighbourhoods in this state should we embrace them. I note that it is a response to two major inquiries this Parliament has conducted within this term: the inquiry into ecosystem decline that Mr Hayes referenced in his second-reading speech, as well as another inquiry he referenced, the recent inquiry into the planning framework in Victoria. It is a really commonsense bill that addresses a major gap in our planning legislation. The current Planning and Environment Act 1987, although it is ‘Planning and Environment’ in name, is almost all about planning and does very little to protect or conserve the environment and completely ignores the threat of climate change. We know from the outcomes that we see every day that development trumps environmental concerns every single time, but planning and climate and environment are actually intrinsically linked, because the way we develop and use the land we have will have a long-term impact on our climate and our ability to mitigate the worst impacts of climate change. This bill would ensure that the purpose of the principal act is to establish a framework for planning the use, development and protection of land, the protection of the environment and native species and the response to climate change.

We know through these really significant inquiries that the Parliament has conducted recently that planning in Victoria is totally failing to both protect the environment and properly prepare for climate change. Instead it favours developers and their profits. We hear it so often, and my office has certainly heard over the years from residents who have been devastated by vegetation and tree canopy loss in their community, something that Mr Davis referenced as well. Developers just build to the edges of lots and raze the existing vegetation because there are very few protections for existing trees and other vegetation. Tree canopy loss on private property is one of the biggest issues facing urban development. There are so few protections of the private tree canopy on people’s private lots. There is work happening in the public realm, but one of the reasons we have had to accelerate the work of tree planting in the public realm is to compensate for the really rapid decline in the private tree canopy that we once had. There has been a total lack of statewide guidance or rules on planning for climate change, and this is demonstrated in example upon example, particularly from our local councils. While the government will cite work that is underway, and we commend the work that has begun, we know this work has to accelerate as quickly as possible. It is important that we have these ongoing reviews and reforms, but what has come through very consistently both from our local councils, particularly the local residents who are fighting planning matters on all fronts every single day out in our communities, and from experts in planning law and statutory planning is that the lack of consistent and enforceable guidelines and the fact that it has taken years to even get some of that review work underway have meant that we have lost so much of our local environment, our local biodiversity and the opportunity to actually improve urban development outcomes—because of the lack of consistent guidelines for a number of years.

In terms of the inquiries that have recently been conducted, and most recently the planning inquiry, many submissions, as Mr Hayes referenced, specifically mention the lack of any consideration of climate change in planning rules and guidelines. This came through very strongly particularly from our local councils, who in their written submissions said that while local councils could have strong aspirations for climate change action and mitigation, they were let down when it came to implementing those aspirations within the planning system under a planning framework that they have to adopt because it is state planning policy, which often overrides and supersedes local planning policy and local strategic visions in other areas—for example, in terms of climate and environmental protection. So the state rules trump the local rules, and there is this real disconnect, they were telling us, right across the board—and this was planning experts as well—in the fact that we can have aspirations at a local council policy level but then the local council are hamstrung by state policy. This is why we need reform at the state level, which is what this bill is aiming to achieve.

The inquiry also suggested through its evidence that we need to more explicitly link planning decision-making and outcomes with climate change adaptation and mitigation. As I and others have expressed in this chamber previously, there was a real missed opportunity in the planning inquiry in that we did not have public hearings for that inquiry, despite hundreds of submissions of really high quality, in-depth submissions and a real thirst from the community, who have been crying out for some attention on what has been happening with the planning system in Victoria. While the government might claim that they are on to it and they are conducting reviews—and we welcome that work—we should not be afraid of hearing from the community who are at the interface of the planning system being implemented into reality. They experience the development next door that is able to get away with so much because there are not strong enough rules. They get to experience what happens when local planning decisions are made on a lot-by-lot basis without thinking about the broadscale implications of what all that development will do to the built form of that neighbourhood and what it will do to the local environment for transport, ensuring sustainable and active transport can prosper as well. Our planning system lets our communities down day in and day out, and it is really important that we get on with that urgent reform.

The inquiry had so much potential to make very strong recommendations about where we could start with that work, what gaps we need to fill urgently. While the submission evidence is captured in the planning report, it was a real missed opportunity not to be able to make very strong recommendations to government. I suspect this would have been one of the strong recommendations that we made to government should we have been allowed to make recommendations in that report, but the Greens will not stop pushing for a full parliamentary inquiry with full public hearings so we can hear from the community, hear from planning experts, hear from local councils who have been doing years of work, who have the solutions, if only the state government was willing to listen and partner with communities in improving our planning and environment framework.

Coming back to the bill in terms of what this bill is aiming to do and what it is aiming to mitigate in terms of the long-term impact of bad and unsustainable development, what it is attempting to do is ensure that we do not see the worst effects of the urban heat island effect, which is caused when you do not have enough green open space and tree canopy cover. It traps heat in developed places with lots and lots of concrete and can make areas up to 3 degrees hotter or even more. We are on the precipice of experiencing some of the really dangerous impacts of climate change. We are seeing that in cities across the world, and our cities are just not ready to adapt to some of those changes, so it is really important that we pay attention to what this bill is aiming to do, which is to get our local environments ready for, unfortunately, impacts of climate change that we could have prevented if we had acted earlier. Hopefully we will be able to take the action to prevent further impacts from climate change if we can limit global warming.

We also know that when you do not plan for your cities properly and you do not take into consideration environmental and climate issues what you end up with is unlivable cities where people are just not able to inhabit sustainably places that they need to call their home, where the air becomes unbreathable, the places become unmovable and places become unsafe and uninhabitable. We need to think about how we can turn this around, and we have opportunities in this place with bills like this before us and with parliamentary inquiries that we have moved and begun in this place to put solutions on the table and to work across the board to put these solutions into practice.

I commend Mr Hayes for his work in this area, for the work that we have done in the planning inquiry. That work is unfinished, but we will continue to pursue that because it is really, really important. We hear day in and day out from communities that this reform is urgent. It is very, very overdue, and it would have an immediate material impact if we took changes like this and implemented them straightaway. I urge the government to listen to what communities are saying, and while they were not willing to hear from communities directly in the inquiry, there are other platforms in which you can listen to communities in terms of what they are experiencing and the frustrations they are feeling when they see their urban neighbourhoods being degraded by poor decision-making and lack of consistent strategic planning, oversight, enforcement of rules and having the rules in place in the first place. I commend this bill, and I look forward to working with others to advance a number of the objectives of this legislation.

Dr CUMMING (Western Metropolitan) (16:39): I rise today proudly to support Mr Hayes’s Planning and Environment Amendment (Wake Up to Climate Change) Bill 2022. He has shown much passion for the environment in this chamber over the last four years, and for me as an independent here I have really enjoyed working with Mr Hayes.

For the Western Metropolitan Region and for the people of Victoria, the environment is something that they care about passionately. For me, in this chamber I have brought up air pollution in the western suburbs of Melbourne. My community has been fighting for better air quality in Victoria. Air pollution is one of the issues that I was able to raise here in this Parliament, and I was able to have an inquiry. My community in the west also cares strongly about waste management. There have been many times around waste management that the community has looked forward to actually having a waste-to-energy plant or some other solution to our waste problem. My community in the west are sick of seeing the amount of plastic on our beaches—at Altona and Williamstown. They have had enough. They want to actually see real action when it comes to our waste management, because we all understand that by not having proper solutions around waste and recycling, not having the opportunity to have a container deposit scheme, we are continually having litter in our streets that ends up in our drains and then ends up in our local waterways, and we are absolutely drowning in plastic.

Our environment is one of the major concerns, I believe, of all Victorians, because we are actually seeing the lack of species, habitat loss and the reduction of tree canopy. Most local councils in the western suburbs have been pushing very strongly. In the west of Melbourne we really lack trees and tree canopy, and for the last 20 years I know that there has been a great push for more tree planting to make sure that we are actually changing our landscape and having those cool zones that are much-needed. Nearly every member of council in my area has been pushing to have the funds to make sure they can actually plant the trees.

I went for a drive only this weekend through Sunbury, and you can still see kangaroos on the side of the road. If you go down through Keilor and along the Maribyrnong River, there are still kangaroos and wallabies and echidnas. We are not far from the city, so we need to be able to protect the native environment in our area and make sure that the development encroachment does not stop our locals being able to walk into a lovely bush environment or a lovely environment along the Maribyrnong River or our wetlands or our coast in Altona or Williamstown. We need to still have those for future generations. My community in the west are so passionate about their little local pockets of beautiful parks that are just pristine. There are so many community groups that I could thank that come out and pick up rubbish and do the planting, making sure that there are the right trees planted for the birds in my local area.

But obviously our environment is under extreme pressure, and I believe this bill goes towards pushing this government to make sure that they actually take our environment more seriously. When it comes to air pollution—and pollution in general, whether it is litter or in our air—we need to actually have some proper targets. We need to make sure of our air quality. We all breathe air, and we want to make sure that our air is clean for us and our children. We need to find innovative solutions to make sure that our air is clean by actually not pumping pollution into the environment. I will leave my contribution at that. I would like to thank Mr Hayes for bringing this forward today. I am looking forward to hearing the next speaker.

Mr QUILTY (Northern Victoria) (16:46): I will in fact be brief. The Liberal Democrats will not support this bill. The key feature of this bill is to create an obligation on planners to consider not only significant effects of climate change but insignificant and incremental ones as well. Under the current code the Victorian Planning Authority is already required to consider the environmental impacts of developments, and there are already an increasing number of hoops that need to be jumped through before any shovels hit the dirt. Planning already involves unnecessary green tape, and this bill represents little more than an attempt by the Sustainable Australia Party to use climate change to tighten the grip of green tape around planning in Victoria and to limit future developments, to keep the green, leafy suburbs for those wealthy enough to already own houses there—and the rest can presumably eat cake or at least smashed avo on toast because they certainly cannot afford a house of their own.

As we know from the existing swamp of red and green tape, this bill would have a clear effect: to increase the cost of developments, limit the supply of new houses and damage the economy. At a time when government regulations have placed home ownership out of the reach of far too many Victorians, this is a reckless course of action. We have a housing crisis, and this bill deliberately sets out to make this worse. We want to cut through red tape and green tape, not add to it. The Lib Dems do not want to further limit the supply of housing and push up prices beyond the reach of even more Victorians. We want to release more land and build more homes as fast as possible. We need to build enough new homes in Victoria so that property prices stop rising. This bill is the opposite of what Victorians need.

Mr MELHEM (Western Metropolitan) (16:48): I also rise to speak on Mr Hayes’s bill, and I want to acknowledge and thank Mr Hayes for his interest in climate change and his desire to change the Planning and Environment Act 1987. I sit with Mr Hayes on the Environment and Planning Committee. I know his views very well in relation to the environment and planning, and I commend him on his views. I will say that I agree with a lot of the stuff Mr Hayes is trying to achieve in this place, but unfortunately, with the time frame he is proposing and because there has not been significant or any engagement with stakeholders, we are not able to support the bill in its current form.

I just want to talk about the things we agree on and about the Andrews government’s commitment to addressing the issues of climate change. I think the state of Victoria is probably one of the most progressive states in relation to action on the environment. For the past eight years we have been in government we have been actually delivering on improving our standing in relation to the environment overall. For example, in terms of targets, the Victorian government has legislated to basically have net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. On that point, I welcome the Albanese federal Labor government’s legislation of only a few weeks ago committing to a 43 per cent reduction by 2030.

Unfortunately the same cannot be said about the former federal Liberal government, which basically treated the climate change issue as a joke. This target, which is zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, has been set by the Victorian government through the Climate Change Act 2017. We are consulting on the 2035 target, which will be settled by April 2023, particularly should we get re-elected and given the honour to continue in government going forward. I am looking forward to that further work and setting the new target for 2035.

I want to now talk about some of the areas we have not talked about but we have actually implemented in the past eight years. I want to congratulate not just the Premier and the whole cabinet but Minister D’Ambrosio, who has done a lot of work in this area through her commitment to achieving zero emissions by 2050 and implementing all the policies of the government—things like, for example, the National Construction Code. There is a lot of work on the way at the moment, trying to get some improvements in relation to the efficiency and performance of residential dwellings, which is currently being considered through the National Construction Code. That will introduce a 7-star national home energy rating scheme requirement and a whole-of-home energy budget for residential dwellings. Some of these areas we are working on already in Victoria, whether we talk about the take-up of solar systems or whether we talk about, for example, replacing inefficient hot-water systems in homes in Victoria or replacing gas heaters in Victoria. They are a few examples. Even recently an announcement by Minister D’Ambrosio came out of the Environment and Planning Committee, which Mr Hayes and I sit on, in relation to whether new dwellings in Victoria need to be mandating installation of gas, for example. What some of these examples I have given show is, basically, we are doing things to achieve these aims. We do not just want to meet the minimum standards in the Paris agreement, we want to be the leaders. I think Victoria is the leader when it comes to climate change action.

We all know that, due to climate change and global warming, since 1910 Victoria has warmed by 1.2 degrees Celsius, and we have got floods, bushfires et cetera. Climate change is real, so we are definitely not deniers. Some people in this house, in the conservative part of politics, think it is all a conspiracy and it does not exist. Well, it does exist, but we are doing something about it. That is why the built environment adaptation action plan was released in April 2022. It is one of seven adaptation action plans that are required by legislation and guided by Victoria’s climate change strategy. The action plan will include a five-year strategy to enhance the resilience of our cities and towns to the elevated impact of climate change. As part of that, it identifies 19 actions for the Victorian government, including staged updates to planning and building standards to address the elevated risk associated with floods, fire, heatwaves, drought and erosion. The point I am making is—and this goes to what Mr Hayes is trying to propose in his legislation—we are already doing a lot of that stuff, and we will continue to do so because actions speak louder than words.

I talked about the Solar Homes program—200 000 households to install solar panels and hot-water systems. I talked about heat pumps, hot-water systems, batteries in the home et cetera. That has taken off really well, which is welcome. The zero-emissions vehicle road map, investing in the rollout of public and fleet-charging infrastructure across the state, is again a Victorian initiative. We are pushing that nationally. And again, now with the Albanese Labor government we should be able to work together to make sure we can achieve a national policy in relation to that. Also we are looking at establishing the six renewable energy zones.

Ms Terpstra talked about in her contribution—in my own electorate of Western Metro—supporting the Greening the West initiative to plant 500 000 new trees in growth areas across six councils in my electorate, providing more shade and green spaces. That is not something we are just talking about, we are actually doing it. We are close to being halfway towards achieving that goal. We all know the western suburbs, the western part of Melbourne, has experienced enormous growth over the last 10 years, and potentially in another 10 years it is going to be double or triple the size of what it was a few years ago. Therefore as a result of that we need to change the way we live in the west. I live in the west, and I have noticed that change; in one area the west is now getting greener and greener. By investing in planting half a million trees in the west we can help in reducing the impact of heat, because if you have simply empty paddocks or concrete, it is a recipe for disaster, particularly in the hotter months. It is important as well, and I want to thank the minister for actually leading that project in my own electorate.

There is also the commitment for Victoria’s 18 water corporations to reach net zero emissions by 2035—Minister Shing talked about that this morning in her ministers statement to the house—which will make Victoria’s water sector the first in Australia to commit to net zero by 2035. The $20 million New Energy Jobs Fund will support Victorian-based projects to create long-term, sustainable jobs. That is another example.

So if we want to talk about energy efficiency and talk about achieving some real, tangible goals in relation to climate change, I think it is fair to say that the Andrews Labor government is leading the way, and rightly so. I think it is not something that we just have to talk about, it is not a luxury that is something we may need to do; it is something we must do. We must deliver on that, and we are delivering. We will continue working on that. For example, the wind tower project in the Bass Strait, when it is up and running, hopefully can replace some of the coal-fired power stations which we rely on today to basically power our houses and our industries in Victoria. I think Dr Ratnam proposed something the other day in relation to closing down the coal-fired power stations by 2030. I would love to see that happen, but the question is: is it a realistic time frame? Possibly not. We need to move to renewable energy, and the government is working hard to make sure we achieve that, but at the same time we need to make sure we have got a balanced approach and make sure that we have a sustainable industry.

In conclusion, Victoria will continue to work towards achieving a decent climate change outcome for our citizens of Victoria collectively. These measures will outline the significant work the Andrews Labor government is doing and will continue to do to ensure Victoria will protect its natural environment and be responsible and adaptive to climate change. With these words I will finish my comments. Again, thank you, Mr Hayes, for bringing this to the house.

Ms PATTEN (Northern Metropolitan) (16:59): I am pleased to rise to make a very brief contribution to Mr Hayes’s Planning and Environment Amendment (Wake Up to Climate Change) Bill 2022. I think we need to give Mr Hayes credit. I think this is the best title of a bill this term. It is very snappy, Mr Hayes. Well done.

As I said in the address-in-reply to the Governor’s speech at the commencement of this term, we are seeing more and more weather extremes and we do need to start thinking of mitigation plans for that. We are looking at La Niña going on for a fourth year, so we are going to see floods on top of floods on already soaked land. We need to be really leading in this very true and existential threat of climate change. The forecasts are compelling, the scenarios are devastating. The other big issue is how we restore. This is the decade. We are probably too far along so we are going to just be looking at mitigation, but can we restore some of these? Can we pull it back? And that means we need to be transitioning quicker than we are now to zero emissions.

There is work being done, and it is not bad. As we heard from Dr Ratnam and then we heard from Mr Melhem, there is some work being done, but it does need to go faster. Looking at the zero emissions that Scotland is working towards, they are much more ambitious than Victoria. Also their housing will be zero emissions by 2030. By 2030 they will be at zero emissions. If you look at the big build over there, it is 100 000 houses in 10 years—100 000 social houses—and they will all be double glazed, they all will be zero-emissions housing, and that will be done by 2030, including the retrofitting of existing public housing. Other countries show us that we can take a lead as long as we pay attention to it, and that is what this bill does. This bill insists that we pay attention to climate change when we are looking at planning decisions.

I think this is an intelligent bill. As Mr Hayes pointed out, it brings us into line with the Local Government Act, which requires us to be considering these issues. To that end, Mr Hayes’s bill can engage us to consider more and more how we deal with the consequences of climate change but also how we can look at reducing climate change in the coming years, which will be absolutely crucial. On that, I support this bill.

Mr HAYES (Southern Metropolitan) (17:03): I would like to thank everyone who spoke. Thank you, Ms Patten, for saying it is an intelligent bill. The title is Wake Up to Climate Change but unfortunately, as I suspected, the two major parties have not yet woken up. They say that we can slumber on for a few more years.

Ms Terpstra said that these amendments are not required because everything is already there in the act. If that is the case, why did submitter after submitter to not only the planning scheme inquiry but the ecosystem decline inquiry say that we were not performing well, that a link had to be made in the planning scheme to climate change. We had many submissions along those lines; I raised them in my second-reading speech. There were many submissions on this. Even the Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, which I am sure advised the minister on my bill, said that challenges and threats arising as a result of climate change need to be addressed. They said that at a hearing in the inquiry into ecosystem decline. Even the Planning Institute of Australia said in response to the Auditor-General’s report into the planning scheme that there is lack of clear guidance to address climate change in the planning scheme.

So you have got people like that saying that there needs to be action, as well as local councils and environment groups such as the Victorian National Parks Association, Environment Victoria, Friends of the Earth all saying that this sort of objective—talking about climate change—needs to go into the planning scheme, yet it is resisted here by the government and the opposition. How are they going to meet the net zero 2050 target if they do not start doing something about it?

I want to read something from some notes I was given. Decisions made today will be seen in buildings for decades to come. More than half of Australia’s 2050 building stock will be constructed in the next 30 years, with no legislation to guide it on climate change. This bill, as Ms Patten said, is an intelligent bill. It sets broad objectives here and a broad framework. That framework, yet, has to be put into the state planning provisions and local planning provisions. They are worried about unforeseen consequences and the effects that would have on development for private and public projects. All that can be fleshed out as we draw out the regulations that need to inform the planning framework. All that stuff can be done.

But demolition and construction, which we do all the time—we are knocking down buildings; some of our buildings will not last 20 years and yet we knock down and rebuild—has to meet climate change objectives. The Australian Institute of Architects say 25 to 40 per cent, depending on how they are measured, of our greenhouse gasses come from demolition and construction and how we handle this at the moment, yet there are no clear guidelines in the planning scheme. There are vague references to protecting the environment, but that usually comes down very low in the list after the economic considerations are taken into account. So we really need to strengthen this if we are not going to try to fix up the mistakes that have been made in the past—we have got to fix them—and the future mistakes that are coming. Unless we take action, they are going to present even more and more problems.

As Dr Ratnam talked about, decisions need to be made on the macro and on the micro scale, otherwise you are taking out trees—two or three trees at a time. But where that destroys a wildlife corridor you have to take that into account, otherwise you are taking out a mini forest bit by bit. And this is what has happened in many, many suburban developments. We are seeing that go on more and more. At the moment you can clear any amount of trees as long as you are not exceeding something like 4000 square metres without a permit. You can just knock down a mini forest without a permit at the moment. This is crazy stuff. And we have got all that stuff about the heat island effect that has been raised here today too—that we are creating a heat island effect—and there is nothing in the planning scheme with teeth. Mr Davis says he wants to protect trees, and he makes that part of his speech, yet he resists putting anything into the planning scheme that is going to protect trees. He says, ‘I want to protect all these trees out in the eastern suburbs’. But when it comes to putting teeth into the planning scheme, they go silent on that; that is not what they want to do.

So, really, we have got to get on with it. We have got to be proactive on this. The Victorian Greenhouse Alliance and the Council Alliance for a Sustainable Built Environment, supported by councils across Australia, are calling on all MPs to come together to make essential changes to the Planning and Environment Act 1987 to include obligations around climate change. They are calling on MPs to do this. The government and the opposition say they are listening to that, but I say both the Liberal Party and the Labor Party went backwards in the last federal election. People elected teals on climate change. We are facing an election coming up in November. So MPs facing election: have you woken up to climate change? I will be interested to see how we vote on this.

House divided on motion:

Motion negatived.