Mr KIELY - 2004-06-16
Yesterday, the Prime Minister released a major policy statement on Australia’s energy future. Can you please inform the House of the impact this policy will have in assisting the development of major new energy projects and infrastructure here in the Territory and throughout Australia?
ANSWER
I thank the member for his question, Madam Speaker, as it is a very important one. However, my answer is a very simple one: very little. There is very little in the Prime Minister’s statement to assist in the development of major new energy projects and infrastructure in the Territory and, very sadly, throughout Australia.
Members in the House would be well aware of the fundamental role energy plays in sustaining our economy, our jobs and our lifestyle. Quite simply, it is where our economic activity starts.
The Prime Minister acknowledges this when he noted in his policy statement that Australian demand for energy is worth $50bn each year. Our exports are worth an additional $25bn, and demand will grow by 50% by 2020. He also noted that Australia will require at least $37bn of new investment just to meet that projected energy demand.
Throughout the developed world, governments understand that there is a role for them in ensuring that their country’s long-term energy future is not just left to the boardrooms of the global energy players. Last year, I called on the federal government to develop a national energy policy, and I congratulate the Prime Minister for taking that step with the release yesterday of that paper, Securing Australia’s Energy Future. As you would expect, it is a very substantial document, and we will be working through it in the coming days and weeks.
There are elements that give some comfort that Australia is looking more seriously at all forms of energy. Initiatives aimed at emission reductions and technology trials are most welcome. Similarly, the reforms to fuel excise will assist mining and pastoral businesses, which are two key sectors of our economy.
However, what I was most keen - and I am sure everyone in this House was most keen - to know, was what effort and energy would the federal government direct towards getting both new energy projects off the ground, and the construction of new pipelines and other infrastructure that would provide the widest possible diversity in the Australian marketplace. Disappointingly, the opportunity has been lost once again. The federal government will just not step up to its responsibilities in these crucial areas. The Prime Minister says that …
Mr Dunham: You want the borders changed.
Ms MARTIN: Put your partisanship aside and look at what the statement says, and what he has not delivered. The Prime Minister says, ‘jump’ and that side of the House goes, ‘How high, Prime Minister?’ That is what we are hearing now.
The Prime Minister says that commercial decisions alone will determine the nature and timing of resource projects. Our projects in the Territory and in other parts of Australia must compete for opportunity and capital against projects in other countries, where their governments are nowhere near as shy about pressuring for development. This is a hands-off approach to one of the most crucial issues for Australia - our energy and economic security.
When I wrote to the Prime Minister in May 2002, I made the point that Australia must make greater use of our abundant natural gas resources. Our policy settings must encourage that. The Territory’s National Energy Policy Paper of June 2003 suggested that the federal government should encourage new investment and exploration; recognise the requirements of major gas projects; improve the regulatory environment; support strategic investment to enhance Australia’s energy supply security and support self-sufficiency; enhance environmental outcomes; take the national interest implications into account in considering major projects; and establish the right to influence the nature and timing of projects.
It was interesting for me to attend our own SEAAOC Conference last week and hear the Indonesian Director General for Electricity Energy Utilization, Dr Sumiarso, speak about how his country establishes a right to reserves of up to 25% of a field’s gas production for the domestic market. I am not advocating this approach for Australia, but it does provide a stark contrast .with Australia’s current approach.
Greenhouse is also a major issue throughout the Prime Minister’s paper. However, fuel switching to gas, which would deliver an immediate environmental benefit, did not figure in the strategy. While I applaud all efforts to reduce greenhouse gases, I struggle to understand why Australia would invest in trying to make inherently dirty fuels less dirty when we have so much clean gas under our feet and our oceans.
Overall, the Prime Minister’s paper deals with many issues, but the focus is on tinkering with the existing framework - modifications here and adjustments there. What Australia deserves is leadership in the hard areas and a focus on nation building. There must be a vision based around exploiting our gas reserves - Sunrise, Evans Shoals, Blacktip, Petrel and Tern. North-south and east-west pipelines are all great projects that should be elevated in the national debate.
Unfortunately, the Prime Minister’s paper simply does not do that. As such, the impact of this policy, which could have been a real opportunity to make a substantial difference, is much less than we would have hoped and Australia deserves.
ANSWER
I thank the member for his question, Madam Speaker, as it is a very important one. However, my answer is a very simple one: very little. There is very little in the Prime Minister’s statement to assist in the development of major new energy projects and infrastructure in the Territory and, very sadly, throughout Australia.
Members in the House would be well aware of the fundamental role energy plays in sustaining our economy, our jobs and our lifestyle. Quite simply, it is where our economic activity starts.
The Prime Minister acknowledges this when he noted in his policy statement that Australian demand for energy is worth $50bn each year. Our exports are worth an additional $25bn, and demand will grow by 50% by 2020. He also noted that Australia will require at least $37bn of new investment just to meet that projected energy demand.
Throughout the developed world, governments understand that there is a role for them in ensuring that their country’s long-term energy future is not just left to the boardrooms of the global energy players. Last year, I called on the federal government to develop a national energy policy, and I congratulate the Prime Minister for taking that step with the release yesterday of that paper, Securing Australia’s Energy Future. As you would expect, it is a very substantial document, and we will be working through it in the coming days and weeks.
There are elements that give some comfort that Australia is looking more seriously at all forms of energy. Initiatives aimed at emission reductions and technology trials are most welcome. Similarly, the reforms to fuel excise will assist mining and pastoral businesses, which are two key sectors of our economy.
However, what I was most keen - and I am sure everyone in this House was most keen - to know, was what effort and energy would the federal government direct towards getting both new energy projects off the ground, and the construction of new pipelines and other infrastructure that would provide the widest possible diversity in the Australian marketplace. Disappointingly, the opportunity has been lost once again. The federal government will just not step up to its responsibilities in these crucial areas. The Prime Minister says that …
Mr Dunham: You want the borders changed.
Ms MARTIN: Put your partisanship aside and look at what the statement says, and what he has not delivered. The Prime Minister says, ‘jump’ and that side of the House goes, ‘How high, Prime Minister?’ That is what we are hearing now.
The Prime Minister says that commercial decisions alone will determine the nature and timing of resource projects. Our projects in the Territory and in other parts of Australia must compete for opportunity and capital against projects in other countries, where their governments are nowhere near as shy about pressuring for development. This is a hands-off approach to one of the most crucial issues for Australia - our energy and economic security.
When I wrote to the Prime Minister in May 2002, I made the point that Australia must make greater use of our abundant natural gas resources. Our policy settings must encourage that. The Territory’s National Energy Policy Paper of June 2003 suggested that the federal government should encourage new investment and exploration; recognise the requirements of major gas projects; improve the regulatory environment; support strategic investment to enhance Australia’s energy supply security and support self-sufficiency; enhance environmental outcomes; take the national interest implications into account in considering major projects; and establish the right to influence the nature and timing of projects.
It was interesting for me to attend our own SEAAOC Conference last week and hear the Indonesian Director General for Electricity Energy Utilization, Dr Sumiarso, speak about how his country establishes a right to reserves of up to 25% of a field’s gas production for the domestic market. I am not advocating this approach for Australia, but it does provide a stark contrast .with Australia’s current approach.
Greenhouse is also a major issue throughout the Prime Minister’s paper. However, fuel switching to gas, which would deliver an immediate environmental benefit, did not figure in the strategy. While I applaud all efforts to reduce greenhouse gases, I struggle to understand why Australia would invest in trying to make inherently dirty fuels less dirty when we have so much clean gas under our feet and our oceans.
Overall, the Prime Minister’s paper deals with many issues, but the focus is on tinkering with the existing framework - modifications here and adjustments there. What Australia deserves is leadership in the hard areas and a focus on nation building. There must be a vision based around exploiting our gas reserves - Sunrise, Evans Shoals, Blacktip, Petrel and Tern. North-south and east-west pipelines are all great projects that should be elevated in the national debate.
Unfortunately, the Prime Minister’s paper simply does not do that. As such, the impact of this policy, which could have been a real opportunity to make a substantial difference, is much less than we would have hoped and Australia deserves.
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016