What we learned, Monday 24 June
Thanks for following today’s blog. Here is a wrap of the major headlines.
The government has struck a deal with the Greens to pass its anti-vaping legislation, which will see medicinal vape products available over the counter at chemists.
Former NSW Liberal MP Matt Kean is the new head of the Climate Change Authority.
The Greens have said the supermarket code released today won’t do enough to bring down food prices.
The Victorian government has opened expressions of interest on a huge parcel of land near Melbourne’s CBD it says could be home to up to 20,000 people by 2051.
The former ACCC chief Rod Sims, who now chairs the renewables thinktank the Superpower Institute, said nuclear power will increase household power bills.
More than 50 people gathered at Queensland’s LNP headquarters in Brisbane on Monday as the fallout over Peter Dutton’s controversial policy continues.
Amy Remeikis will be back with the Politics Live blog from Canberra tomorrow morning.
Updated
See how Australia’s new voting maps mean entire electorates are disappearing
The Australian Electoral Commission has redrawn the voting map for parts of Western Australia, Victoria and New South Wales ahead of the 2025 federal election.
Matilda Boseley explains what the new map could mean for Australia’s democratic fault lines:
More information on the new vaping changes
From 1 October, vapes will be available in pharmacies over the counter without a prescription; buyers will have to have a conversation with a pharmacist, who can provide information on the health risks, and give access to health advice and guidance about other tools to quit smoking.
Buyers will have to show ID to buy the products. These vapes will not be available over the counter to children; if under-18s genuinely need access to vapes as a tool to quit smoking, they would still require a GP prescription.
Therapeutic vapes will be restricted to mint or menthol flavour and tobacco flavour. They will have to come in child-resistant packaging, and will be plain packaged also.
There will be limits on the concentration of nicotine in the vape products.
The amended laws also make it clear that individuals should not be criminalised, with the upgraded penalties only targeting commercial vendors.
The pharmacy products will have to meet high product standards from the government, and can only be imported into the country with a government licence.
Updated
Health minister challenges opposition to back the changes to vaping bill
Butler said in a statement the changes came after “constructive engagement with the crossbench.” They’ve now got enough Senate support to pass the bill this week, ahead of the 1 July changes.
From that date, vapes will only be available with a doctor’s prescription. However, from 1 October, the laws will change again to allow vapes to be bought over-the-counter after a discussion with a pharmacist at the chemist - similar to access to pseudoephedrine. They will remain in plain packaging, and without appealing flavours, only as a therapeutic tool.
Butler told us in a statement:
Our world-leading laws will return vapes and e-cigarettes to what they were originally sold to the Australian community and to governments around the world as: therapeutic products to help hardened smokers kick the habit.
From Monday next week, it will be unlawful to supply, manufacture, import, and sell a vape outside of a pharmacy setting. These laws protect young Australians and the broader community from the harms of recreational vaping, while ensuring that those who really need access to a therapeutic vape for help to quit smoking, can get one from their local pharmacy.
Butler said he hoped “the Opposition supports these world leading reforms and that this Bill can be met with multi-partisan support.”
We brought you news this morning that the Australian Medical Association had slammed the Nationals in a blistering letter to leader David Littleproud, accusing them of taking the advice of the tobacco lobby over health experts.
Butler continued:
Peter Dutton and all Liberal Senators now have a choice: will they side with the Nationals and Big Tobacco against the concerns of parents and teachers, or will they join with a majority of the Parliament in protecting the health of young Australians for generations to come?
The best time to have done this was five years ago. The second-best time is right now.
Updated
Treasurers’ budget night hospitality spending ‘failed to comply with the rules’
Almost $25,000 spent on budget night hospitality for Labor treasurer, Jim Chalmers, and former Coalition treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, failed to comply with the rules, a fresh audit report has found.
The probe by the Australian National Audit Office into whether the Department of Treasury has been following the rules of its gifts, benefits and hospitality policy found four instances of non-compliance, totalling $34,123.
In particular were two occasions on budget nights in March 2022 and May 2023. The audit office said $14,990 was spent on hospitality expenses for the event in Frydenberg’s then office.
The funds were spent with “no written record of approval prior” in a move contrary to the federal government’s accountability rules and the department’s internal policy.
“Verbal approval that was provided by an official from the Treasurer’s office did not have sufficient delegation,” the report, released on Monday, said.
A later budget night event in Chalmers’ office occurred in May 2023, under the Albanese government, where $9,502 was spent “with no written record of approval prior”.
Under the rules, a written record of approval needs to be made “as soon as practicable”.
The report said:
The written record of approval was provided on 28 June 2023 which was 55 days after the expense was incurred on 4 May 2023.
Updated
Labor MP Josh Burns has said the deal the government struck with the Greens to pass its anti-vaping legislation was sensible and not a radical change to the original scheme.
The deal will see medicinal vape products available over the counter at chemists - a slightly relaxed version of the government’s original scheme to make them available only after a GP’s prescription - and an eight-month amnesty period for people possessing vapes which will soon be made illegal.
Speaking on ABC Afternoon Briefing Burns said:
There are a number of safeguards that have been built into the amendments that the minister for health has announced, so I think that this is a sensible thing…
We’ve seen the smoking and vaping rates go through the roof. They try to get people addicted via a whole range of flavours and I think that this is a sensible reform to reduce the number of people vaping and smoking and not increase it.
Updated
‘Duttonheimer’: Qld protesters lash LNP’s nuclear plan
Protesters have rallied outside a major Liberal National party office to slam the federal opposition’s nuclear energy plan.
More than 50 people gathered at Queensland’s LNP headquarters in Brisbane on Monday as the fallout over Peter Dutton’s controversial policy continues.
It marked one of the biggest protests since Dutton pledged on 19 June to build seven nuclear plants across five states on the sites of coal-fired power stations, if elected.
Queensland Conservation Council’s Paul Spearim said First Nations communities had not been consulted on the nuclear energy plan, sparking fears about its impact on the environment and people.
Stuart Traill, from the Electrical Trades Union, called the opposition leader “Duttonheimer” and queried why nuclear was now suddenly a priority.
“If they wanted nuclear power they could’ve done it when they were in power for 10 years,” he told the group of protesters.
- AAP
Updated
The Coalition says its nuclear plants will run for 100 years. What does the international experience tell us?
The federal Coalition’s pledge to build nuclear reactors on seven sites in five states if elected has continued to raise questions this week.
Ted O’Brien, the shadow energy minister, says the plants can operate for between 80 and 100 years, providing “cheaper, cleaner and consistent 24/7 electricity” compared with renewables.
That claim comes despite the CSIRO’s Gencost report estimating each 1-gigawatt nuclear plant could take 15-20 years to build and cost $8.4bn. The first may be double that given the high start-up costs.
But what does the state of the nuclear energy internationally tell us about the Coalition’s proposal?
Peter Hannam explains here:
Hello! I’ll now be with you until this evening.
And on that note, I will hand the blog over to Jordyn Beazley who will take you through the evening.
We will be back with more parliament first thing in the morning – it is party room meeting day, where no doubt the nuclear chats will continue in earnest.
Until then – take care of you.
Littleproud says ‘be calm’ as Coalition pushed for more details on nuclear policy
For those people asking for the detail on the opposition’s nuclear policy, the Nationals leader, David Littleproud, says to chill. It’s coming. Sometime before the next election (due in May):
You’re going to see the details. You’re going to see the details before people go and vote. Before referendum day, call it referendum day or election day this time around. You’re going to see the details. Anthony Albanese didn’t answer the questions.
We are going to take the Australian people on this journey.
We have done the first stage. Now the second stage will be about those costings – about the modelling, so that we’re very upfront and honest.
So there’s a big difference – a big difference between what you might call as vague, what you might think here is a bubble, but what’s playing out at the tails of households around the country every time they see their energy bill go up.
What’s an alternative way to achieve this and give sustainability to the future.
That’s a vision that Peter Dutton and I are going to show in detail. We’re prepared to do it.
And I think that you just need to be calm and I’ll just say to everyone in the [press] gallery – I know that you wanted [the answers] tomorrow, because it helps the new cycle.
But you’ll get your turn. You just need to be calm.
We’ll be there with you every step of the way.
Updated
(Continued from last post)
There would be a review of this legislation after three years, an expanded framework for disposals, and extra funding to support young people trying to quit vaping.
Health spokesperson for the Greens, Jordon Steele-John, said: ““The Greens do not support prohibition, that is why we have successfully secured changes to this legislation to ensure that vapes remain out of the hands of kids, but adults can access them via a pharmacy, and there’s no chance of individuals being criminalised for possessing a personal vape.”
We must ensure that no one is incentivised to return to cigarette smoking and that people can get support when they need it. That’s why the Greens have focused on making sure adults can get access to therapeutic vapes when they need them. We’ve moved the government from a cost-prohibitive prescription model to a model where adults can pick up a vaping product from their local pharmacy without a prescription.”
Labor and Greens strike deal to pass anti-vaping legislation
In news breaking just now, the government has struck a deal with the Greens to pass its anti-vaping legislation, which will see medicinal vape products available over the counter at chemists - a slightly relaxed version of the government’s original scheme to make them available only after a GP’s prescription - and an 8-month amnesty period for people possessing vapes which will soon be made illegal.
We can bring you some information about changes the Greens say they’ve negotiated with the government. We’ve reached out to health minister Mark Butler for comment. The Greens say the change to the GP-only model was a consideration around cost for people who may need the products for legitimate health reasons, and an effort to avoid criminal issues for people still possessing now-outlawed vapes.
The Greens’ amendments include making vapes available from a chemist as a Schedule 3 pharmacist-only medication for adults over 18. The products will still be plain packaged and regulated, with only mint and menthol flavours - no bubblegum or fairy floss flavouring.
We’re also told that possession of personal use quantities of any form of vape will not be subject to criminal charges, and there will be an 8-month personal possession amnesty period.
Updated
The video team went through the ‘well actually’ mansplaining battle between Peter Dutton and Richard Marles to make this for you:
Protesters gather outside Liberal-National office in Brisbane over Coalition’s nuclear policy
More than 50 people gathered at Queensland’s LNP headquarters in Brisbane on Monday as the fallout over Peter Dutton’s controversial policy continues, AAP reports.
Environmental groups and union members joined concerned citizens at the Albion office to lash the nuclear plan, dubbing the federal opposition leader “Duttonheimer”.
It marked one of the biggest protests since Mr Dutton pledged on June 19 to build seven nuclear plants across five states on the sites of coal-fired power stations if elected.
Two of the proposed sites are located in the Sunshine State - at Callide in central Queensland and Tarong, northwest of Brisbane.
Updated
Lots of big emotions in the chamber today.
Here is how Mike Bowers saw it:
Toddlers who are having big emotions are taught the birthday candle trick – your hand is a birthday cake and each finger is a candle – five big breaths can blow out all the candles AND help regulate your emotions.
Perhaps that could become one of the standing orders, to assist the speaker in controlling the chamber.
Updated
Question time ends
Just seven more to go this session! Aren’t we all lucky ducks!
And just on whether Julian Hill, who was booted out from QT just over a minute after it started, was a record, we are told that Tony Smith once booted Labor’s Tim Watts out of QT in under a minute.
So there you go.
Updated
Chalmers takes question on supermarkets from Bandt
Adam Bandt asks Jim Chalmers why the government won’t support the Greens proposal for divesture powers with the big supermarkets and is instead legislating a code Bandt says the supermarkets were in favour of anyway:
Is Labor just tinkering around the edges again with a code that will be good for farmers but do nothing for consumers? Instead of just making price gouging illegal?
Jim Chalmers:
The member for Melbourne might not be interested in a fair go for farmers and families, but we are on this side of the house and the difference between the member for Melbourne and this government and the member for Melbourne; his main job is to issue angry press releases about the action that the government is taking to get a fair go for farmers and families to make sure that we’re making what was a voluntary code mandatory, dramatically increasing the penalties and providing bigger and better avenues for people to make complaints and have those resolved.
Now, I would have thought even in a world where the Greens political party wants the Labor government to go further than we have, I would have thought at the very least, the Greens would welcome the progress that has been made today. And if they were fair dinkum, they would if they were fair dinkum about what’s happening in the supermarket sector, they would welcome these important steps and they wouldn’t stop there, they would also welcome the fact that we’ve empowered the ACCC to play a much more active role in this sector.
They’d also welcome the fact that we funded the consumer group choice to provide the kind of price transparency that we need in the market.
They’d also provide support for our efforts to strengthen and streamline the mergers regime in our economy. But the Greens political party, they’re not fair dinkum about these issues. And that’s because they always prioritise having a barney with the Labor party over doing the right thing by consumers. And that’s what we’re seeing here. And we see that question in this light.
Updated
‘Can you give us a range?’: Ted O’Brien’s final straw
Ted O’Brien pushes his luck, interjecting with:
Can you give us a range?
And Milton Dick sends him out of the chamber.
Anthony Albanese finishes with:
One of the great distinctions now, and I didn’t think when I first came to this place, I’d say this, but this side of the House, the Labor Party believe in working with the business community, but believe in private sector investment.
That side of the House have adopted Soviet tactics, they want a command economy.
It’s got to be all funded.
The taxpayer subsidies will all be there with centralised planning.
Which is why they hide the cost, because it simply doesn’t stack up. There isn’t a single investor or a single bank, a single financial institution. Not even not even their mates, not even their mates are queuing up to say, I’ve got some money for nuclear reactors. And that’s because it doesn’t stack up, which is why they are hiding the costs.
Updated
PM on green hydrogen
Anthony Albanese continues:
So the world is looking towards green hydrogen as making a major contribution to the shift towards net zero by 2050, whether it be in Asia or in Germany, with the agreements that we’ve signed in cooperation and research, whether it be the investment where investors are queueing up to invest here in Australia, to invest their own money.
Not taxpayers’ money.
One of the things we’re talking about with green hydrogen, as opposed to their nuclear reactor plan reactors, is private sector investment. That’s right. And one of the things that we’ve done with our support that was announced in the budget for green hydrogen and critical minerals is because of the way that it’s designed. It’s designed to reward success. That’s right. Reward success.
So it’s only when it succeeds that there is taxpayer incentive for private sector investment. And that draws a big contrast.
Ted O’Brien tries with a point of order on relevance, which Dick shuts it down.
You would like a date and an exact time and an answer. But under the, well, deja vu, under the standing orders, there’s no compulsion for me to under the standing orders or ability to get the minister or the prime minister to answer exactly the way he is talking about the topic. He is being directly relevant. (Dick says deja vu here, because he has had to make this point a few times).
Updated
Ted O’Brien ejected during energy debate
This question and answer seemed to take about 10 minutes, so bare with me here – but it ends with Ted O’Brien getting booted out of the chamber by Milton Dick, so there is something for everyone here.
O’Brien:
When does the government expect green hydrogen to be commercially viable?
Anthony Albanese:
Well, one of the things about green hydrogen is that the world is looking to the opportunity that will come from the creation of green hydrogen and the great advantage is that we have, compared with countries like Japan and Korea, is space. So we can create through having large-scale solar and wind projects ….
Daniel Hurst hears Peter Dutton interject with:
Could someone get him an answer please?”
Albanese points at Dutton:
The renewable source is off and running, Mr Speaker.
Milton Dick tells everyone to shut it.
Updated
Protesters issue statement as ‘anti-Zionist Jewish Australians’
The protesters who attempted to disrupt parliamentary question time have issued a statement explaining their stance as anti-Zionist Jewish Australians.
(At least five people were quickly marched out of their places by security, and Anthony Albanese continued answering an opposition question throughout, so the normal proceedings were not really disrupted.)
The anonymous statement said the Australian government’s actions to date were inadequate, “so today, we took our protest to Parliament House” calling on Canberra to ”take tangible measures to stop Israel’s genocide in Gaza”. It said:
A large and growing number of Jews in Australia have been calling for a ceasefire for many months, and saying that Israel’s actions are completely incompatible with our Jewish values.
The international court of justice has yet to make a substantive ruling on South Africa’s allegations that Israel’s conduct in Gaza amounts to genocide, but said in an interim ruling in January that “at least some of the rights claimed by South Africa” were “plausible”.
The Israeli government has rejected the genocide allegations as “false and outrageous” and has said it is justified in its military response to Hamas’s 7 October attack and hostage-taking.
The Australian government has repeatedly condemned Hamas’s 7 October attacks and called for the release of hostages, while also urging Israel to comply with international law.
Updated
Albanese takes question on housing as a human right
Kylea Tink has the next non-government question.
The independent MP for North Sydney asks:
Prime minister, my community of North Sydney believes that our current housing and homelessness crisis is exacerbated by a lack of long-term leadership, thinking, commitment and ambition. They also believe that access to housing is a fundamental human right. Prime minister, do you believe that access to housing is a fundamental human right? And if yes, why won’t you protect that right by legislating a national housing and homelessness plan?
Anthony Albanese:
I certainly believe that access to housing is a fundamental right in an advanced society such as ours. And I know that the security which having a roof over your head gives you is a precondition for being able to seek employment, for being able to enjoy the opportunities that are there by getting an education at university or Tefl school of looking after your family. And that certainty that is provided. As someone who grew up in, in public housing, that certainty that provided for me and my mum was really important in being able to actually think ahead and to have that security. So we certainly believe that.
Albanese then runs through the government policies in this area and calls for the Senate to support Labor’s housing bills.
Updated
Marles mansplains on nuclear in response to Dutton’s mansplaining
Richard Marles returns and addresses Dutton’s mansplaining attempt with some of his own:
Well, actually, it doesn’t burn any fuel because burning is oxidisation, which is what happens in an internal combustion engine.
Which is exactly what happens when you use hydrocarbons.
What this is, is a nuclear reaction which gives rise to power.
So that is actually what happens inside the sealed nuclear reactor.
The point is that the waste that will need to be that will need to be disposed of, is there to be disposed of when that reactor has reached its end of life and that is the in the early 2050s.
But, Mr Speaker, the point is this is a civil nuclear reactor, and that is designed to power cities, uses fuel rods, and there are spent fuel rods which are not the size of a can of Coke, but are actually measured in tonnes, which will be produced each and every year from the moment that you operate that power station, and it will need to be disposed of as soon as that occurs.
And if these reactors that the leader of the opposition is proposing for a civil nuclear industry is to have any impact at all on achieving zero net emissions by 2050, then we are talking about those reactors being in place in the 2030 and the 2040s, which means we’re talking about tonnes of waste. In the 2030s and the 2040s.
We are talking about the need to dispose of our first spent nuclear reactor in the early 2050s.
Updated
Milton Dick warns Peter Dutton over 'abusing the standing orders'
Peter Dutton has another question for Richard Marles:
I refer to the deputy prime minister’s earlier answer and confirmation that waste from the nuclear propulsion system will be stored on the submarine in the reactor for many years. Can the deputy prime minister confirm that it is safe for the sailors, for the submariners to be in that environment?
Marles:
I thank the leader of the opposition for his question and for his benefit I’ll try and take this slowly.
There is eight sealed nuclear reactors which are going to be utilised for the nuclear powered submarines that the Navy will operate. What a sealed nuclear reactor means is that for the life of the reactor, it does not need to be refuelled. And so it exists within the reactor. When the reactor is disposed of, is the first moment that there is a need to dispose of high-level nuclear waste.
Peter Dutton has a point of order:
It’s on relevance and perhaps to be of assistance to the minister. The propulsion system burns energy. That’s how the system is working, and it’s stored in …
Milton Dick has his microphone turned off and then issues a general warning – if that happens again, Dutton will get booted.
The leader of the opposition is gaining the habit of abusing the standing orders. It’s not an excuse to get up and just give a statement. He knows that … And it is not in order to raise other material.
Look, it’s going to be really simple. If this behaviour continues, I don’t have to take points of order as other speakers have done. And if people abuse the standing orders, they’ll immediately leave. So just setting out for the next two weeks how things are going to roll.
Speakers, as a general habit, do not send out senior members of the parliament, out of respect for the office and because there is meant to be some level of argy bargy as part of how Australia runs question time. But it seems that Dutton has pushed it a little too far for Dick’s liking – Dick has given countless warnings on this topic over the last couple of months, and this is the Speaker’s way of saying – no more.
Updated
Richard Marles continues:
What we have is a set of questions, which are trying to draw an equivalence between how we operate eight nuclear reactors in respect of eight single machines and how those opposite might seek to establish a civil nuclear industry with power stations which are intended to power cities.
It is like comparing a car engine with a coal-fired power station because they both burn hydro carbons.
That is the silliness of the comparison that they are engaging in.
The reason that so many differences apply here is best illuminated by the question of nuclear waste, because for those to establish power stations in any kind of time frame which would have any dent on getting to zero net emissions by 2050 would see tonnes of high level nuclear waste needing to be disposed of in the 2030s and the 2040s.
I repeat – the first nuclear reactor under Aukus that we will need to dispose of will be in the early 2050s.
This is precisely why those opposite have absolutely no idea of what they’re talking about, what they need to be telling the Australian people is how much does it cost?
When is it coming and how much power will it produce? In the absence of those questions, all they have for the Australian people is a lemon.
Updated
Marles takes question on nuclear waste from submarines
David Littleproud is up next, with another question for Richard Marles:
Australia’s in the process of acquiring a fleet of eight nuclear-powered submarines under Aukus. Australia will be responsible for the management of spent fuel from the submarine reactors as part of this deal. Will this nuclear waste be stored in Australia? If so, where?
Marles is not playing:
As we announced in March of last year when we announced the optimal pathway for acquiring a nuclear-powered submarine capability in this country, we made clear we would be responsible for the disposal of the nuclear waste, as I referred to in the answer to the last question that was asked by the shadow minister for defence.
We have also made clear that we will be announcing in the coming months a process by which the site will be established for the disposal of the nuclear waste.
The point to be made here, as I made in answer to the previous question, is that the first nuclear reactor, which will need to be disposed of, will be due for disposal in the early 2050s.
In answer to the question of spent fuel rods, this is a sealed nuclear reactor and so there are no spent fuel rods.
It does not need to be refuelled and so the first time we will need to be disposing of high level nuclear waste will be in the early 2050s. Yes, we do have time to go through a process of determining where that site will occur. The one point we have made, which we made again in March last year, was it will occur on defence land.
Updated
Richard Marles continues:
To draw an between eight nuclear reactors powering eight civil machines and civil nuclear reactors which those opposite are proposing, intended to power cities is like drawing a comparison between a car engine and coal-fired power station because they both burn hydro carbons.
The two couldn’t be more different.
Those opposite are talking about using the nuclear waste facility that will be developed for AUKUS when the first of those reactors is not due to go out of service, will not need to be disposed of until the early 2050s when those opposite are trying to say we should be heading towards zero net emissions by 2050. The reality is that their civil nuclear power stations will be generating tons of…
Sussan Ley has a point of order on relevance and Marles is told to stick to the question.
Marles:
They have made their announcement on a nuclear power industry and on day one of question time, they no longer want to talk about it. That is where they have got to with their policy.
You want to raise a question about safety, the entirety of the nuclear cycle forms part of the question of safety.
It is directly relevant, in terms of the question that was asked by the honourable member.
The fact of the matter is we will not need to be disposing of a nuclear reactor until the early 2050s. They are proposing a nuclear industry which will be generating tonnes of high level nuclear waste well before that if they want to have - make any impact to zero net emissions by 2050.
You can talk about a culture war between nuclear or nonnuclear. At the end of the day, the critical issue here is what they are proposing is economic insanity.
At a time when we have high energy bills, they are pursuing the single highest source of energy on the planet and they are unable to tell us how much it will cost, when it will come to pass or even how much power it will produce?
Opposition conflates nuclear submarines with nuclear reactors
Andrew Hastie asks the defence minister, Richard Marles:
Is it safe Australian personnel to be on nuclear submarines with nuclear reactors?
This is obviously part of the opposition’s plan to conflate nuclear reactors which power submarines with those which power the energy grid.
Marles is not falling for it:
The short answer to the question is it will be safe [Coalition MPs celebrate this statement] on a nuclear powered submarine but while those opposites are trying to have some kind of cultural war between nuclear and non-nuclear, at the end of the day, this is about economics because this is economically insane what they are seeking to do.
To draw an equivalence between eight nuclear reactors which will power eight single machines against those opposites are proposing which are meant to be powering cities ….
Hastie gets up with a point of order, but Milton Dick offers some free advice – the answer is relevant, so he probably shouldn’t be trying for a point of order on relevance.
Hastie: That’s where I was going.
Dick: Well you don’t need to.
Hastie: He said it was safe.
Dick: Yep.
Hastie sits down.
Updated
Energy minister takes question on power prices
Chris Bowen has taken a dixer on power prices so he can attack the opposition’s nuclear policy:
They think they know better than the CSIRO but they will not release their cost.
The leader of the National party let the cat out of the bank today, we know what they are but we will not tell you.
We will get around to telling it when we choose. What does this mean for the Australian people?
The director of the Monash energy Institute said the impact could be up to $1,000 a year for electricity bills go nuclear*.
The former ACCC chairman said it would probably increase by well over $1,000 per annum.
… The next election will be on his nuclear plant but if you do not let people know, they can vote no because the Australian people deserve better than this game they got last week from the leader of the opposition, they deserve a plan that can work and that is what this government is delivering.
*That is a reference to this Guardian story from Adam Morton and Paul Karp:
Updated
Crossbench question on cash as last protester removed
The protesters have been removed from the gallery.
Question time continues with Andrew Gee asking the first question from the crossbench and its about cash:
Many residents in towns and cities across our great country hold real fears that cash in Australia has been phased out and will soon disappear. Will the government support my keeping cash transaction bill and keep cash king in our nation?
Jim Chalmers has a very long answer, but Gee says it is not answering the question. So now we get the truncated answer:
First of all, there is a future for cash in the economy, second we have put a lot of effort to ensure cash continues to work across the whole country, and as I have indicated with the Member privately and happily to share publicly, we are prepared to consider the proposal put forward in his bill. I indicated some level of caution about small businesses and in good faith we will see what we can do to accommodate the views put to us in a considered way in his bill.
Bob Katter interjects:
Point of order, Mr Speaker: I think the house should acknowledge your support for cash in this place.
Milton Dick quips in response:
Anyone interested can see me later.
(For those needing a translation, which I imagine is most of you, as most of you have lives, unlike myself, and don’t follow the blow by blows of *everything* that happens in this place – the parliament-run dining hall went card-only, which Katter discovered while trying to get his lunch one day. He was OUTRAGED and immediately took it up with the Speaker who happened to be there getting his fish and steamed vegetables, who said he would look into it. Katter immediately released a media statement saying Dick was reviewing the situation, and Dick settled things by having one of the payment terminals continue to accept cash in a trial, to see if it was used.)
Updated
Daniel Hurst is in the chamber and hears one protester shout “stop the genocide,” as she is marched out and that Anthony Albanese continued answering the question as the protest continued.
Ted O’Brien continues as chamber ignores protest chants
The chamber is continuing without referencing the protest.
Ted O’Brien has a point of order which is not a point of order:
The question was to the prime minister ‘What is the total system cost of the government’s plan?’ This will be his third go at this one.
He is told to sit down.
Anthony Albanese:
No wonder they are struggling with numbers, he cannot work out this is question two for those opposite! You do not have to count on your fingers, you can count your arms or your legs, either one will do, Mr Speaker.
But this is what the Australian Energy Market Operator had to say, renewable energy drew down prices in the first quarter of 24 despite higher temperatures pushing up electricity demand.
We are increasingly seeing records being set which is a good thing for Australian consumers as it is key in driving prices down. Mr Speaker, we want lower prices, lower emissions. They want higher emissions and higher prices. That is the difference between the two approaches in this chamber.
The protesters can still be heard; “Jews for a free Palestine ... stop arming Israel” as they are removed from the gallery one by one.
Updated
‘No wonder he is melting down’: Albanese on Dutton and his nuclear plan
The protesters can be heard shouting “Jews for free Palestine” as Anthony Albanese answers O’Brien’s question:
I note the report that the member refers to and they have been referring to it. It also makes comments about nuclear energy. They say that it doesn’t stack up. It should be ruled out. It says ‘Don’t do it’.
As any rational person who has looked at what Australia’s energy needs and what the opportunities we have are, because as I said, we have these great renewable energy resources, we have solar, we have wind, we have the anger of the leader of the opposition who made an announcement last Wednesday and then had a meltdown on Saturday.
No wonder he is melting down, because one of the things that this reflects is the fact that since the election in 2022, the lesson learnt by those opposite is they’re not rightwing enough, they are not in enough climate change denial, they are not sceptical enough and they are not against market place mechanisms enough, because what they have done is come out with a position which mainstream Liberals oppose, that’s why we worked constructively with the former Dominic Perrottet government to make a difference, to put caps on coal and gas, to make sure we had the energy price relief plan that has made a substantial difference and in one week’s time, Australians will benefit, every household, from $300 off their energy bills.
Updated
Protesters interrupt question time
Ted O’Brien’s question is interrupted by protesters in the public gallery:
Some in the public gallery are standing up and chanting in protest against the war in Gaza.
At least five protesters in the public gallery are shouting: “Jews for a free Palestine … stop arming Israel.”
They are being ushered out one by one.
Updated
Back to Ted O’Brien
After the first dixer, it is back to Ted O’Brien, who seems to have recovered from his Insiders interview yesterday.
The Princeton University’s net zero Australia report has modelled the capital cost of the energy transition according to a similar pathway to the government’s current plan for the cost of between $1.3 and $1.5tn. Prime minister, what is the total system cost of the government’s plan?
Updated
‘You’re in government, champ’
There’s lots of laughter on the government benches at Peter Dutton’s opening question.
Someone on the Coalition’s benches said “you’re in government, champ”.
Labor MP Julian Hill had a smile on his face as he was ejected (possibly a speed record).
Updated
Anthony Albanese continues:
Albanese:
We do have a plan on this side of the house. It is a plan that has been legislated. A plan for net zero by 2050, a plan for a 43% reduction by 2030. The capacity investment scheme to drive investment in renewables. The safeguard mechanism that was thought of by former [coalition] minister Greg Hunt but which we have legislated as well. The reason why we have done that is because we know that the cheapest form of new energy is renewables. Australia is home to some of the greatest sources of renewable energy in the world; sunshine, wind and the leader of the opposition’s anger and negativity.
Labor finds this last line HILARIOUS.
Paul Fletcher is outraged and has a point of order, saying the prime minister is refusing to uphold standing orders (and be relevant).
Milton Dick seems to hold back a sigh and says:
Let’s me give the house some assistance. If everyone could take down the temperature on this issue, sorry question, it will enable me to hear the prime minister.
Albanese continues:
Our plan is working. We have seen a 25% increase in renewables in the grid.The highest uptake in the world of rooftop solar, record investment in batteries and storage and wholesale power prices that have dropped almost $300 a megawatt hour since we came to office, almost $300 per megawatt hour.
We have already added 8.5 gigawatts, they can’t say how many gigawatts. They can’t say how many reactors, they can’t say how much gigawatts. More than 50 renewable projects have been approved, enough to power 3m homes.
Updated
Question time begins
Peter Dutton opens up question time with:
Prime minister, what is the total cost of the government’s energy plan and what will the capacity investment scheme cost taxpayers?
There is laughter from the Labor benches (because the Coalition won’t give the costings for its nuclear policy).
Labor’s Julian Hill is booted from the chamber by Milton Dick for interjecting.
Anthony Albanese:
You have to and that to the leader of the opposition. At a time when the rest of us are working to get power bills down, he has picked the one option guaranteed to push power prices up. Push power prices up.
The economics of nuclear do not stack up. That doesn’t worry those opposite. They spent a decade in power without a single surplus and left Australia with a trillion dollars of debt. The leader of the opposition is offering a blank piece of paper, demanding a blank cheque to pay for it.
Dutton has a point of order on relevance which Dick … upholds.
Updated
Eden-Monaro was one of the nation’s rare bellwether seats – meaning it swung behind the representative whose party would go on to form government, right up until 2016, when it went Labor, despite the election being won by the Coalition.
Labor held the seat (on a very slim margin) through 2019 and then in the byelection which saw Kristy McBain elected in 2020.
Condolence motion for Gary Nairn
Question time won’t start just yet – there is a condolence motion for Gary Nairn, a Howard government MP for Eden-Monaro. Nairn spent his entire time in parliament in government, entering in 1996 and leaving in 2007, so never sat on the opposition benches.
Updated
We have headed over to the House of Representatives chamber in time for the airing of the MP grievances (90-second statements).
The LNP are running the nuclear line as expected, but the Labor member for Boothby, Louise Miller-Frost, has used her time to talk about post-covid syndrome, which is a change of pace.
Updated
So, what is the Climate Change Authority?
The Climate Change Authority is an independent statutory body, which is not political – it reviews climate change policies, and provides independent advice to government on those policies.
It remains the decision of the government of the day what advice it takes.
Here is the announcement of Matt Kean as the incoming head of the authority, once Grant King’s term is completed in August.
Updated
‘Could you trust him?’: Barnaby Joyce accuses Matt Kean of treachery
Federal Nationals frontbencher Barnaby Joyce has accused the former New South Wales Liberal treasurer Matt Kean of treachery for accepting an Albanese government appointment as chair of the Climate Change Authority.
Joyce has told Sky News that the appointment confirms where Kean’s loyalties lay:
I mean, the only thing that’s consistent is this guy is treacherous.
That’s what’s consistent. And of course in the past we can now sit back and go, ‘he was never in our party’.
He should have joined the Labor party at the start when he left school. Signed up. Maybe that’s his natural home.”
Joyce says everything Kean had ever said now should be questioned.
Could you trust him? Can you trust him with all that he said, with always [advocating] with the sort of bleeding heart, ‘I wanted to save the world’ kind of approach? Or do you think you’re a mischievous, duplicitous person who was taking us all for a ride?
Updated
Question time looms
There is just under half an hour until the first question time session of this sitting.
You know it is going to be messy, so grab what you need to get through it.
Speaker Milton Dick has just been through the press gallery with a therapy dog, so looks as if he is prepared.
Meet Bailey.
Updated
Governor general’s salary to increase by $214,000
The Albanese government has introduced a bill to alter the governor general’s salary.
From the legislative explanatory memorandum:
Section 3 of the Constitution provides that the salary of the Governor-General shall not be altered during their continuance in office. The Bill amends the Governor‑General Act to change the sum payable for the salary of the Governor-General from $495,000 to $709,017.
In line with past practice, the proposed salary is calculated by reference to the estimated average salary of the Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia over the notional five-year term of the appointment of the Governor-General.
Where, in the past, a Governor-General has been the recipient of other Commonwealth entitlements – such as a judicial pension – the annual salary has been adjusted accordingly.
Ms Mostyn is not a recipient of any such entitlements.
How was that calculated?
Well:
The chief justice’s current salary, as determined by the Remuneration Tribunal is $649,880 a year. In five years, the chief justice’s salary is expected to be in the order of $769,989, based on projected wages growth, with an average over the period of $708,017.
Updated
What is a private member’s bill?
A private member’s bill is any bill which is introduced by someone other than the government of the day.
Because the government controls the House of Representatives, it also controls the business of the day. In order for a private member’s bill to be debated, the government would have to bring it on by adding it to the business of the day, or the house would have to vote to change the business of the day and the government lose that vote. The government could only lose a vote if a few of its members didn’t make it into the chamber and everyone else voted the other way (and even then, it can call for another vote, using it normal numbers). You are unlikely to see Labor MPs cross the floor, especially while in government, as to do so would mean explosion from the party, if the vote meant they were going against an established caucus position on an issue.
So unless the government supports a private member’s bill, there is not a lot of chance of it getting up.
The Senate is a different story, as the government doesn’t control the numbers there. But any bill that passes the Senate first still has to go to the house – which makes it very difficult for private members’ bills to be debated.
Updated
Kylea Tink pushes to make housing a human right
As previewed by Paul Karp, Kylea Tink has introduced legislation in the house which would establish an overarching national housing and homelessness plan that would make housing a human right in Australia. David Pocock has done the same in the senate.
Tink says the national housing and homeless plan would be directed towards:
Ensuring that everyone in Australia has adequate housing;
Preventing and ending homelessness;
Ensuring the social housing system meets needs and drives wider housing system improvement;
Improving choice in the housing system, including between owning and renting;
Improving housing quality, including the quality of existing and newly constructed houses;
Improving housing affordability;
Improving housing supply; and
Improving the contribution of the housing system to wider economic performance
Updated
Victorian minister apologises for Indigenous disadvantage
Giving evidence at the Yoorrook Justice Commission, the Victorian housing minister, Harriet Shing, apologised for the dispossession of land and ongoing disadvantage faced by Aboriginal communities, AAP reports.
Shing:
We created Aboriginal homelessness and then we turned away from it, and for too long, we refused to even acknowledge that its existence and impact was our doing.
For that, I am sorry.
Indigenous Australians make up about 3% of the population, but account for one-in-five people facing homelessness nationally, according to census data.
The inquiry has heard that 17% of Aboriginal Victorians were seeking homelessness support, a figure growing 10% annually.
Pushed to explain what her government was doing to improve ongoing disadvantage, Shing pointed to the Victorian Aboriginal Housing and Homelessness Forum and Aboriginal Housing Victoria, and noted she continued to advocate for more funding from the federal government:
I’’m not giving any impression that the system is perfect, but there is a lot happening.
Updated
Crossbench pushes to amend Labor’s EPA bill
The independent MP Sophie Scamps and others on the crossbench are planning to move amendments to Labor’s legislation establishing an Environmental Protection Agency.
Scamps wants to end the exemption in the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act for regional forestry agreements. This wouldn’t ban native forest logging, but it would apply federal approval processes to it. There are also calls to make the EPA more independent, due to concerns the environment minister appoints the chief executive officer, not its board.
Scamps said:
Australia is a global deforestation hotspot. We lead the world in mammal species extinctions. The government has committed to ending extinctions and preserving our biodiversity but this will not happen unless we start protecting our forests immediately.
The government has committed to ending the Regional Forest Agreement (RFA) exemptions but has not committed to a timeline and has said this may not happen until 2040.
If the government is genuine about ending native species extinctions – we must preserve our native forests and the most effective and important step to achieve this is by ending the RFA exemptions immediately.”
Tanya Plibersek has previously suggested the forestry issue will be dealt with in the third tranche of its reforms, but there are fears this could be next year or even in the next term of government.
Updated
‘A total false economy’: AMA head on Nationals’ vaping position
The head of the Australian Medical Association, Dr Steve Robson, is not taking a backwards step in the organisation’s battle to have vaping regulated.
Josh Butler covered off the latest here:
Robson took aim at some of the Nationals’ arguments, including that vapes should be treated the same as cigarettes for tax purposes (and not made prescription only as the government is proposing) in an interview with ABC radio:
I think it’s a total false economy.
In fact, first of all, we’ve seen reports this morning that the amount of revenue that’s raised from taxation of vapes in the US was feeble, it was minimal. And if we look at the situation with cigarettes in Australia, and this is the, I guess, the model the Nats are hoping to follow, the amount of excise raised from cigarette and tobacco sales in Australia every year is about $13bn. But the cost of the harm from tobacco and tobacco smoking is $140bn.
So essentially, for every dollar raised, $10 has to be spent mopping up the harm of tobacco. And we think vapes are going to be exactly the same, so it makes no economic sense whatsoever.
Updated
Armaguard gets $50m bailout to keep cash moving
For those who have been following along with cash transportation business Armaguard’s financial woes, AAP has an update for you:
Cash transport company Armaguard has secured its future for another 12 months after locking in a $50m deal with its largest customers.
The agreement, funded by Commonwealth Bank, Westpac, NAB, ANZ, Coles, Woolworths, Bunnings and Australia Post, means Armaguard will receive monthly payments in exchange for efficiency and restructuring requirements.
The deal comes three months after Armaguard rejected a $26 million deal from the Australian Banking Association, the big four banks, Woolworths, Coles and Australia Post despite being told the company was not financially viable.
Instead, its parent company Linfox, owned by billionaire Lindsay Fox, announced it would pump $10m into the business as Armaguard worked to find solutions to its financial woes.
Updated
To square that circle on the Greens motion to suspend standing orders to debate divestiture powers for the major supermarkets – the government is not supporting it (not surprising, given the Greens were criticising government policy) and therefore the motion will be lost.
Official portrait of David Hurley unveiled at Parliament House
Governor general David Hurley stands in a forest clearing, surrounded by blackened trees sprouting green shoots, in his official portrait in Parliament House. The work, unveiled this morning as Hurley nears the end of his term, was painted by artist Jude Rae.
In his speech at the official ceremony, Hurley advised viewers to pay close attention to the background, and what it represented. As the Queen’s representative, Hurley has regularly toured bushfire and disaster zones nationwide.
“The background is actually far more important in this portrait, because it’s about us as a country. When you see it, it’s about us as a people, representing some of the difficulties we have experienced in the nation over the last five years,” Hurley said.
“It tells us not only the journey we went through, but how strong we are.”
Hurley said he was an “optimist” for Australia. He also praised his wife, Linda, and his family for their support over his term as governor general. Hurley praised his wife as “tireless”.
“If we could have painted a little Linda face in there somewhere, it would have been just the right touch,” he said, saying the portraits collection should consider images of partners in future.
Updated
Max Chandler-Mather says Labor just ‘tinkering around the edges’ of cost of living crisis
Tony Burke has introduced that bill.
The Greens MP Max Chandler-Mather is now seeking to suspend standing orders to talk about the Greens proposal to give the ACCC divestiture powers for the big supermarkets.
Chandler-Mather:
Now they [the government] have agreed to enforce the code of conduct between suppliers and supermarkets and that is good but the problem is they’ve done nothing to touch the huge profit margins that Coles and Woolworths are making. Not only that, but while they are making these huge crisis profits, Labor refuses to even tax them fairly, so we can raise money off Coles and Woolworths and use that to go and help people struggling with the cost of living.
So they get basically massive crisis profits, pay barely any on tax on those excess profits, they don’t have to reduce their market share like supermarkets around the world have to and it’s perfectly legal for them to continue to price gouge ordinary Australians.
People are getting fed up with a Labor government that continues to tinker around the edges of a massive cost of living crisis and refuses to do anything substantial to tackle the structural issues in our economy and political system that allow big corporations to screw ordinary Australians.
Updated
For those watching the House of Representatives and wondering what is going on – Paul Fletcher is attempting to suspend standing orders to make the government bring on the CFMEU demerger bill.
Which sounds very normal.
EXCEPT the government was already bringing on that bit of legislation. Tony Burke is introducing it at midday. Which we are told the opposition knew, and has either forgotten, or the message didn’t get passed along, or they are just trying it on for funsies.
So in about three minutes time, Burke will be introducing the legislation for the CFMEU demerger, as previously scheduled.
Updated
Greens urge Labor to be tougher on supermarkets
The Greens senator Nick McKim is not a fan of Jim Chalmers’ mandatory code of conduct for the big supermarkets – because he says it does not go far enough in addressing the issues:
Is Labor actually trying to help Australian shoppers, or just chasing a headline?
Only the Greens have proposed concrete measures in parliament that will result in lower food and grocery prices.
Divestiture powers exist in numerous free-market economies around the world, and the chair of the ACCC has confirmed that greater competition in the supermarket sector would bring down food and grocery prices.
The Greens will continue to push for measures that foster competition and lower prices. It’s time for the Labor party to decide whether to protect the profits of supermarket giants or provide relief to Australian shoppers.
Updated
The curtin is off!
David Hurley has been painted in a blue shirt (no tie) and camel-coloured pants, holding a hat and standing in the bush.
Mike Bowers will have something for you very soon.
Updated
Josh Butler is at the portrait unveiling and he says the curtain is still well and truly covering the piece.
There has also been no singing as yet.
For those who don’t immediately get that reference:
Updated
PM’s poetic words on Hurley portrait: ‘It captures not just a moment, but holds before us the essence of a life’
Anthony Albanese at the unveiling of David Hurley’s portrait (Sam Mostyn will take over as governor-general from 1 July)
The unveiling of an official portrait for the Historic Memorials Collection is a special occasion that recognises the service of Australia’s highest officeholders.
In my role as chair of the Historic Memorials Committee, I was delighted to see the portrait some weeks ago.
I want to congratulate the artist, Jude Rae, on her remarkable eye and the brilliance of her hand as it painted this wonderful work into being.
I also wanted to acknowledge the governor general’s own commitment to the collaboration with this fine artist. This is the second time she has painted your portrait, and what shines through in the work is a shared understanding.
It is a portrait that captures not just a moment, but holds before us the essence of a life.
Updated
The outgoing governor general David Hurley is having his portrait unveiled in Parliament House as you read this.
Jude Rae was commissioned for the portrait.
Anthony Albanese will deliver the speech for the unveiling.
Updated
Victoria approves huge high-rise housing project in Box Hill
Over on the eastern side of Melbourne in Box Hill, planning minister Sonya Kilkenny has approved a project to build 1,700 new homes across seven high-rise apartment buildings.
As first reported by the Age, Kilkenny has today approved the Box Hill Central North Masterplan, which has been fast-tracked under the government’s development facilitation program, meaning at least 10% of the $1.57bn project will be affordable housing.
The project, overseen by Chadstone Shopping Centre’s Vicinity Centres, will include seven buildings ranging from 19 to 50 storeys tall, surpassing Box Hill’s current tallest building the Sky One apartment tower, which is 36 storeys.
The site of the new project will also feature about 4,000 square metres of retail space, as well as a co-working zone, civic plaza, urban park and new pedestrian and bike paths.
Kilkenny says the apartment towers align with the government’s “long-term vision” for Box Hill, which is the end of the $34.5bn Suburban Rail Loop East train line. As part of the project, the government has taken over planning controls within a 1.6km radius of each of the stations along the line: Cheltenham, Clayton, Monash, Glen Waverley, Burwood and Box Hill.
She says this will lead to the creation of 70,000 new homes. Kilkenny says:
With Melbourne’s population set to be the size of London by 2050, we’re pulling every lever we can to ensure we can get thousands of new homes for Victorians off the ground faster – where they want to live. Box Hill is one of our fastest growing communities and this project will bring more than 1,700 new homes right next to the Suburban Rail Loop – helping us deliver more homes close to jobs, services and great public transport.
Updated
Mike Bowers caught Anthony Albanese looking pretty pleased he managed to surprise people with the Matt Kean announcement.
Here he is as they walked out into the courtyard:
Updated
Minns: ‘There’s a big difference between a block of flats and a nuclear reactor in your back yard’
The New South Wales premier, Chris Minns, has been asked about community support for nuclear and whether his government would work with a future federal government on nuclear if Peter Dutton won the election (a reminder that the Coalition would have to win 18 seats to govern in its own right, assuming it didn’t lose any):
Minns:
Obviously it’s pretty hypothetical. We’re kind of 72 hours into this nuclear debate and there’s a lot of questions that need to be answered by the federal opposition before I think the public will make a final decision about whether they’re for it or against it.
Ultimately, it’s their decision but I’ve got a mandate too and we didn’t run on a platform of repealing [a ban on] nuclear energy in New South Wales and I’ve got major concerns about community responses in the sites that have been picked by the federal opposition.
So I did read the article this morning in the Telegraph, and it did report that Scone, Gloucester and the Hunter, 66% of residents didn’t want it in New South Wales, let alone in their local community.
So that’s seemingly the initial information seems to indicate that there’s overwhelming opposition within that community. Now I don’t regard that as nimbyism.
I mean, there’s a big difference between a block of flats and a nuclear reactor in your back yard. And I think that that’s got to be taken into consideration.
Ultimately, you’re asking these communities to shoulder a nuclear reactor in their community for decades, decades into the future and no community consultation was undertaken by the federal opposition. It was just announced, not sites for potential exploration, just we are building a nuclear reactor in your community. You don’t get a say. I can imagine the communities in both Lithgow and the Hunter region will be furious about it. And I think that that’s borne out by the recent polling from the telegraph this morning.
Updated
Arden precinct land to become housing as Victorian government opens expressions of interest
The Victorian government has opened expressions of interest on a huge parcel of land near Melbourne’s CBD it says could be home to up to 20,000 people by 2051.
The premier, Jacinta Allan, on Monday announced the process will begin to turn the 13.5-hectare parcel of government-owned land at the Arden precinct in North Melbourne into housing.
She says expressions of interest are open until 20 August for the private sector, industry and investors who want to partner with the government to develop the land, with priority to be given to proposals for affordable, build-to-rent, build-to-sell, shared equity and key worker housing.
At least 10% of the housing will be affordable housing, given the land is government-owned.
The government had initially planned to use much of the land to create a new medical precinct, including new campuses for the Royal Melbourne and Royal Women’s hospitals, but the budget in May revealed this was scrapped because of “electromagnetic interference” from the new Arden train station.
Allan says the station is set to open ahead of schedule in early 2025.
This is exactly where we need housing for 20,000 people – close to the Metro Tunnel, Parkville’s hospitals and universities, and on the doorstop of the CBD.
Updated
Chris Bowen says he recommended Matt Kean to cabinet to chair the Climate Change Authority because “I knew he was best for the job”, so a captain’s pick, if you will.
The press conference ends.
Dutton's nuclear plan is 'a scam with scant details', Bowen says
Chris Bowen adds to that answer:
To add briefly what these polls show and I don’t normally comment on them but they do reinforce the views that are expressed to me by Australians every day.
Renewables are not only the cheapest form of energy, they are the most popular. And the fact is Mr Dutton’s nuclear policy, as much as it is a policy – I use the term lightly because it is a scam with scant details.
It is an anti-renewables policy. That is what is driving it. They have to decide what lane they are in.
On the one hand they say we don’t have enough renewables but what they actually say more often as we have too much renewables.
They think we’re too successful.
If Mr Dutton is really pleased and proud of this, where other costs? Where are the gigawatts?
Where is what it will mean for renewable energy? Mr Littleproud this morning said that he knows the costs but is not prepared to share them yet with the Australian people. We are happy to debate this every single day between now and the next election. Every single day.
Updated
Dutton is ‘on the fringe’ of politics and ‘nowhere near the centre’, PM says
Anthony Albanese continues:
They paid proponents [of a coal fired power station] at Collinsville in Queensland, to do a study on something that was never going to go ahead.
Fourteen coal-fired power stations announced their closure while they were in government.
Scott Morrison handed around lumps of coal, people might recall, handed a lump of coal around the frontbench. I don’t recommend he does that with uranium.
He handed around lumps of coal, thinking that was a clever thing to do to show that this was the future.
It’s not clear what the future is now, it is clear that coal will close over a period of time, they agree now and LSA, who knows what happens between now and 2040?
That is why it is not a serious plan. A plan that has always been on the fringes of the serious energy debate in this country.
Mr Dutton is on the fringe of Australian politics. He is nowhere near the centre. He is out there on the hard right of Australian politics, being driven by ideology, not common sense.
Updated
Albanese: ‘Peter Dutton doesn’t have a serious policy’
What about the polls showing the public is open to nuclear?
Anthony Albanese:
Have a look at what the polls actually say.
They say solar is more popular than wind and hydro on the go all the way down. Gas being more popular as well.
The fact is that Peter Dutton doesn’t have a serious policy going forward.
We will continue to advance our plan that is serious, that has a mechanism and a method of getting there, of emissions reduction. It is the cheapest form of new energy.
Nuclear power is the most expensive form of new energy and it requires a delay into the 2040s before we have a transition.
What we need to do is to make sure as well that the big question, which is unanswered by Peter Dutton … the big question is what happens in the meantime … into the 2040s in terms of filling the energy gap?
We had a decade in which 22 policies were announced by the Coalition. None of them landed.
But during that whole period, they continued to say that coal-fired power stations would stay open.
Updated
Q: On the 2035 target, there are calls for a 60% target by 2035. Do you think 60% is a realistic target? Will you reveal that target, whatever it is, before the election?
Anthony Albanese:
I’m focused on the 2030 target and delivering the policy we have put in place. That is my focus.
The 2035 target is something for down the track.
I’m very focused on delivering at the moment and I know that when I was leader of the Labor party, people including from the fine media outlets represented here today, every time I did a press conference it was: what is your 2030 target?
I look forward to you continuing to ask those questions of Mr Dutton over and over again.
We have a legislated target in place. One of the things we will do is take proper advice. That is what we do, including from the Climate Change Authority.
Updated
Albanese: ‘I have been somewhat bemused by some of the coverage’
Is Anthony Albanese concerned the nuclear debate will undermine consensus on Aukus?
No is the answer.
And a supplementary question: when the nuclear submarines are delivered in the future will you allow them to be plugged into the grid when they are tied up at the pier?
Albanese:
I note some in the media and the Coalition have attempted to be very worried about some cartoons and memes going out. I’m happy to engage in facts about nuclear energy because the facts and science tells us it simply doesn’t stack up.
I have been somewhat bemused by some of the coverage because I know that if I stood here as Labor prime minister and said, ‘I’ve got this policy that is going to cost hundreds of billions of dollars, that is going to completely reverse the direction in which Australia is going, but I can’t tell you how much it will cost, I can’t tell you what any of the economics associated with it are, I can’t tell you what the timeframe will be, I can’t tell you who will pay for it’, I reckon the coverage would be a bit different than some of the coverage that is there.
Updated
Albanese tees off on Dutton’s nuclear plan
Anthony Albanese is asked about whether or not a Labor opposition would respect a future Coalition government’s mandate to repeal Australia’s nuclear ban if Peter Dutton won the election.
Albanese:
The Howard government’s ban is in place and we have no plans whatsoever to change it. It has been in place for some time and what we know is that the plan, so-called, put forward by Peter Dutton, a so-called plan that has no costings, but can’t tell you what form of nuclear reactor would be built, that can’t tell you how many reactors will be built at the seven sites that have been selected, that can’t tell you how you would overcome the fact that six of the seven owners of the sites have ruled out [nuclear], the fact that it can’t overcome the state as well as the national ban on nuclear power, the fact that it can’t tell you either what will happen with the waste.
I make this point. This is about delaying the investment into renewables which is required.
The business community stood with myself and Chris Bowen – whether it be the BCA, the Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, the steel industry group, the Clean Energy Council – stood there and said what they wanted for a long period of time is certainty, an environment where they can invest. And that is what we have provided for them, not just with legislated net zero by 2050, legislated 43% reduction by 2030, legislated capacity investment scheme as well as the Safeguard Mechanism as well as the capacity investment scheme. We have a real plan, and what Peter Dutton has done is applied for denial and delay, which is what they did for 10 years.
Updated
Kean says NSW looked at nuclear but ‘I did not want to bankrupt the state’
Matt Kean is asked about nuclear again and turns to his experience in the NSW Liberal state government when the issue came up in 2019, when he was asked to look at replacements for the state’s ageing coal fired power station:
We looked at all options, including nuclear.
In fact, we looked at all options and made decisions based on economics and engineering.
The advice that I received at the time which was most compelling was from the chief scientist of New South Wales, Prof Hugh Durrant-Whyte, and he is one of the few people in the country who has run a nuclear program.
He was responsible for the British government’s [Ministry of Defence nuclear] program and his advice to me was: to bring nuclear into the system it would take far too long and would be far too expensive for New South Wales.
I did not want to bankrupt the state and I did not want to put those huge costs on to families. That is why we produced the electricity infrastructure roadmap which set the transition to renewables, backed by … storage because we know that [was] the cheapest option for New South Wales and it can be rolled out first and deliver the future we [deserve].
Updated
Australia has the opportunity to become a stronger and even more prosperous nation, Kean says
Does Matt Kean think the Coalition’s nuclear announcement will harm the renewables transition?
Kean:
My role is to bring my expertise and experience to provide independent advice to the government of the day … based on facts, science, economics and engineering – to ensure we not only meet the challenges that we can face in doing this transition, but we grab all the opportunities that come with it.
We have an opportunity to become a stronger and even more prosperous nation … but we got to get it right. This is too important to leave to chance. We need policies based on facts, evidence, and that’s what I intend to advise the government on.
Updated
Matt Kean: 'This is not about ideology. It is about what’s best'
Matt Kean says that he had planned on entering the private sector, but could not turn down the opportunity the Albanese government offered him.
As you know, I announced I was leaving politics to pursue a career in the private sector but the opportunity serve as the chair of the Climate Change Authority means I am able to continue providing public service.
The Climate Change Authority has an important role to play in providing independent advice to the government of the day based on facts, science, evidence, engineering and economics.
I intend to follow the tradition and continue to carry myself as I did as the New South Wales energy and environment minister, the Treasurer of New South Wales who oversaw the $115bn budget and that’s to take a pragmatic approach to ensuring that we deliver for families, the economy and protect the environment and build bipartisan consensus where possible.
This is not about ideology. It is about what’s best and the experts tell us and I agree that if we get the transition right, we cannot only put downward pressure on electricity bills for families and businesses right across the country but protect our environment and make our economy even stronger and more prosperous for everyone for ever.
Updated
Chris Bowen is also at this press conference. He says:
Seizing the opposite for Australia of cheaper energy requires our country be all in. It requires not just whole of government effort, not just a whole of government effort but a whole society effort and requires us to harness all the talents and what we’re doing today is appoint one of those talents to the key role of chair of the Climate Change Authority of Australia.
Bowen says he can think of no one better to take the role than Matt Kean.
Updated
‘Mr Kean understands the opportunity that the transition to clean energy represents’
Anthony Albanese:
Matt Kean is an outstanding appointment for this job. I worked very closely with Mr Kean when we introduced of course our coal and gas and our energy price relief plan in partnership with the New South Wales state government and other state governments as well. We know that it made a practical difference.
Mr Kean understands the opportunity that the transition to clean energy represents for our nation.
He understood it as a member of the NSW government and he understands it as someone who has focused his working life in recent years on making a difference, not just today but for generations to come.
And he also understands the folly that walking away from the renewables transition represents foundation and understands as a former New South Wales treasurer the certainty which the business community need in order to invest, to make sure that we address not just the charges but the opportunities that the transition to a clean energy economy represent.
Kean will begin in August, which is when the current chair Grant King finishes up.
King resigned and has taken a role with Transgrid.
Updated
Former NSW treasurer Matt Kean to chair Climate Change Authority
Anthony Albanese gets to the point of the press conference – the former NSW Liberal MP Matt Kean is the new head of the Climate Change Authority.
Albanese:
As a former New South Wales Treasurer and minister for energy and the environment, Matt Kean is uniquely qualified to lead the Climate Change Authority and I am so pleased that he has accepted the government’s invitation to take up the vacancy.
Updated
Seven days until cost-of-living relief, Albanese says
Anthony Albanese has started his press conference to remind everyone the new financial year starts in a week’s time.
And with it, the government’s cost-of-living budget measures:
[It’s seven days] until every Australian counts a tax cut, not just some. Seven days until our energy bill relief kicks in: $300 off everyone’s energy bills. Seven days until 2.6 million low-paid workers get their third consecutive pay rise, backed by this government.
It is also seven days until we continue to provide cheaper medicines and seven days until an additional two weeks of paid parental leave kicks in. In addition to that, today we have made important announcements about further cost-of-living relief to have cheaper groceries with our crackdown on supermarkets, making sure that there is a mandated responsibility, not just voluntary.
A cockatoo screams above him. Albanese says he’s pleased the news has been welcomed “by those above”.
Updated
Lisa Darmanin sworn in as senator
Labor has welcomed its newest senator – Lisa Darmanin has been sworn in as a senator for Victoria.
Darmanin was chosen after Linda White passed away in March.
While in the Senate, Mike Bowers also caught this moment:
Updated
Labor’s ‘24 questions about the Coalition’s nuclear policy’
You may remember Peter Dutton’s “15 questions about the voice” campaign during the referendum campaign.
Labor has now started running “24 questions about the Coalition’s nuclear policy” which Senator Tim Ayres gave a run through at a doorstop a little earlier this morning.
You’ll be hearing a lot more about it, so here is the short version:
What is the plan to deliver the reactors in the time frame? What happens if the technology isn’t ready? What if communities don’t want it? Where is the enriched uranium coming from? How will it be paid for? Where is the waste going? How will the Coalition deal with state opposition? What about local government rules? What happens to the existing renewable facilities on the proposed sites? Where are the geological surveys? What happens to all the renewable power already on the grid? What proportion of the energy mix will be nuclear by 2050? And what will it cost (both in terms of to the taxpayer given the Coalition wants the federal government to own and operate the sites, and individual households)?
Updated
The prime minister has called a press conference for 10.30am in the most fancy of press conference locations – the prime minister’s courtyard.
Expect more nuclear talk.
Updated
Pocock says solar plus batteries is 'the future'
Senators Jacqui Lambie and David Pocock have appeared at a press conference spruiking Pocock and MP Kylea Tink’s call for housing to be recognised as a human right. Both were also asked about nuclear energy.
Lambie said:
I would love to see nuclear energy, but quite frankly I watched the Liberal National parties argue for nine years about low level waste and they couldn’t get their shit together then. So, let’s be honest, good luck to them.”
Pocock said:
Let’s debate energy policy on its merits. I’m failing to see the merit of what they are proposing. You hear from experts that this is going to make energy more expensive at a time when we’re in a cost of living crisis, and one of the key drivers of that is energy prices going through the roof.
You can see some of the cracks in the Coalition’s thinking when they say we need nuclear but we also need household solar. Because they know that is where cost of living can be helped – having solar on more households … looking at batteries on households … That’s the future for Australia.
We need to call out the nuclear play for what it is. We’ve heard Liberal Matt Kean talk about this: they brought the nuclear stuff ... below it is the fossil fuel industry delaying the transition, and that would be disastrous for all of us. We’ll pay the price when it comes to energy bills, and increased insurance premiums, and we’ll saddle future generations with the climate in much worse shape.
Updated
Rod Sims shoots down Coalition criticism of CSIRO’s nuclear report
When asked about the shadow energy minister Ted O’Brien’s claims that the CSIRO report into nuclear costs didn’t take into account the longer life of nuclear reactors and its reputation as a more reliable power source, Rod Sims says if anything the CSIRO report was maybe too optimistic when it came to the costs of nuclear:
There’s a couple of issues. The CSIRO report was incredibly optimistic on capital costs. Its capital costs that it used in its report were probably about half the capital costs being incurred for generation in the UK, the US and Europe, about half of the new-build cost that actually put nuclear in a very favourable light, frankly, more favourable than it should have been.
Now the criticisms of the CSIRO report were that it was not running the nuclear all the time.
That if you’re going to run the nuclear all the time, you know 90, 95% of the time, you’re going to close off renewables – that is because new renewables will always get on to the grid because they come in at a zero price.
And unless you block them, they will be on [the grid] at various times during the day.
So the CSIRO was naturally saying, when you allow for that, you might have roughly 60% capacity from those nuclear plants. And you’ll only get 90% if you find a way of blocking the renewable energy, which seems like a really silly thing to do.
Updated
Nuclear power would cost households $200 more per year, Rod Sims claims
The former ACCC chief Rod Sims, who now chairs the renewables thinktank the Superpower Institute, has told ABC radio that nuclear power will increase household power bills:
I think at best it would probably increase household energy costs by well over $200 per annum. That’s at best.
And let me just unpick that if I could.
So at the moment, if you want to use wind and solar, that’s about $60 to $80 per megawatt hour. If you want to firm that up, which we do because we want it completely reliable, that would cost about $110 a megawatt hour give or take a bit, and you’d be using solar wind up, using hydro pumped hydro gas batteries, so a whole mix of things. And it would be 100% reliable at a cost of give or take $110 a megawatt hour.
If you use nuclear, and you look at the most recent new-build plants around Europe, the UK the US, you are talking at least between 2 and $300 per megawatt hour.
I would just urge people to have a look at the new bills that are occurring in comparable western countries, and they are two to three times the cost of completely reliable, renewable energy-based electricity.
Updated
Let’s go through a few of the things we do know.
One: under the Coalition’s plan to boost gas use until nuclear is ready, power bills will most likely increase:
Two: The ‘28,000 km of new transmission lines’ the Coalition has been using is misleading. The Australian Energy Market Operator calls for just over 5,000km by 2030 and Chris Bowen recently told parliament that one-third of that has already been built. The 28,000km number is for 2050 and the Coalition is not taking into account existing infrastructure that would be upgraded.
Three: The transmission lines are already at capacity, because of the renewables already on the grid, including at the sites Dutton and co want to build nuclear reactors (forcibly if necessary, as they sites are privately owned, and have either existing battery projects, or plans for battery projects) which would mean to make nuclear power work (which can not be turned off easily) then new transmission lines would have to be built to carry the nuclear power.
Because politicians like to have so many of these debates on breakfast television, Jim Chalmers is now having to answer questions like this:
Nine network host: All right, well, if you are going to focus on costs, as you are, the reality is the cost, the actual cost, is unknown. Isn’t that the same case with renewables?
Chalmers:
No, we’ve made it clear in our budgets. We’ve budgeted for the investments that we’re making to attract more private investment in our future as a renewable energy …
Host: Well, what’s the cost of rolling out renewables, then, treasurer?
Chalmers:
Well, if you look at the AEMO report which talks about $121bn from now until 2050, which is less than a tenth of the figures that Peter Dutton is bandying about. We know what AEMO says, the energy market operator says, about our investment needs. We know the kinds of investment we’ll need from the private sector to make the most of this global net zero energy transformation. We don’t know from Peter Dutton how much his nuclear fantasy will cost but we do know nuclear takes longer, costs more, pushes up prices, creates investor uncertainty, and it’s not right for Australia because we’ve got the best combination of renewable energy opportunities, and we’d be made not to make the most of them.
Updated
Barnaby Joyce describes wind turbines as ‘monuments to future obsolescence’
Tanya Plibersek was sent out on the media rounds this morning, but she also had to front up for her standing “debate” with Barnaby Joyce on Seven’s Sunrise.
Of course, Joyce was very fired up on the issue of renewables which he described as:
Now, what we are doing instead [of nuclear] is we’ve got these billionaires, multibillionaires, coming into this building, the independent power lobby, painting the nation with a photovoltaic black, covering our countryside with monuments to future obsolescence, which is your wind towers, covering us with transmission lines, which 40% of your power bill comes from. So what do you think that’s going to do? Another 28,000 kilometres full of new power bill coming into your life.
He’s always been good with the evocative imagery, even if it’s never actually correct.
It devolved into an argument from there, which there is no actual point to running, as it’s basically just Joyce yelling at Plibersek to “stand by your word” and Plibersek trying to get a word in edge wise about, you know, things like the law. And cost.
When it comes to cost, Joyce offers this:
Can I just give one example, one example where that’s wrong. Their own costing at $8.4bn for one nuclear reactor is basically less than what Snowy Hydro 2.0, which only provides 2,000 megawatts for 10 days will do. $12bn it’s costing right at the moment …
Plibersek finally gets some clear air to remind Joyce that:
That’s one of your policies as well, Barnaby.
Joyce:
There’s your renewables. There’s renewables. It’s ridiculous.
Plibersek:
Do you remember Malcolm Turnbull started it?
Because yes, Snowy Hydro 2.0 is a project that started under the Turnbull Coalition government. Of which Joyce was a member.
Updated
Frontline workers priced out of Queensland housing market
Frontline workers are being pushed out of the housing market in Queensland as prices and rents hit levels that are beyond their reach, a report reveals.
Most nurses, police officers, childcare workers and teachers can’t afford to buy or rent a home on their own in southeast Queensland, based on their income and the median price of houses and apartments.
“Most of southeast Queensland is a ‘no go zone’ for frontline workers hoping to get their foot on the property ladder,” Property Council of Australia Queensland director Jess Caire said.
The council on Monday released a report, Beyond Reach, which shows that if you are a single-income critical worker on an average salary of $85,000 buying a house is “beyond hope” and buying a unit is “beyond reach”.
For a dual-income family, with a gross income of $150,000, buying an existing home is ranked “beyond reach” and purchasing house and land packages is deemed “unaffordable”.
Brisbane is now the second-most expensive city in Australia to buy a home, according to data released by CoreLogic earlier this month.
The median house value in the Queensland capital is $937,479, and $615,429 for a unit.
– AAP
Updated
Labor announces review of workplace safety and compensation laws
Tony Burke has announced a review of the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act – the legislation that forms the foundation of the Comcare scheme.
Burke says the legislation has not been reviewed since 2012-13 and there have been no major reforms since 1988.
An independent panel chaired by Justine Ross, with Prof Robin Creyke AO and Gregory Isolani as panel members will start work on the review, today.
Burke:
The nature of workplace injuries and illnesses have changed a lot over the last 35 years. This review will tell us what we can do to future proof the scheme and make sure we’re getting the best outcomes for injured workers.
The panel will engage with a range of stakeholders to seek their insights and feedback, ensuring that the review reflects the experiences and needs of those directly impacted by the scheme.
While the review is underway, applications to join the scheme will only be considered from companies that are members of a corporate group in which most employees are already covered by the scheme.
Before considering further growth of the scheme, we need to ensure the underpinning legislation is fit for purpose and provides effective support for people who are injured at work.
Updated
Grocery code will not bring down cost of living, Greens say
The Greens are not ecstatic about the release of the food and grocery code. The party’s economic spokesperson Nick McKim was out this morning, saying it wouldn’t do enough to bring down food prices at the supermarkets.
“The code of conduct will improve things for suppliers, but will do nothing to bring down the cost of living in Australia,” he told a doorstop in Parliament House.
The Greens had been pushing for divestiture powers to break up the big supermarket chains – a suggestion the government hasn’t been keen to take up.
Updated
Paul Karp has looked at the crossbench bill which aims to make housing a human right:
Coalition did a ‘terrible job’ at consulting communities on energy, Plibersek says
Tanya Plibersek says the Coalition did a “terrible job” of consulting with communities over new energy projects when they were in government, taking another potshot at the confusion over Peter Dutton’s nuclear plan.
“It’s important to work with communities to share the benefits of renewable energy projects and to consider where they’re built, the way they’re built,” she told reporters in a doorstop at Parliament House.
I think the previous government did a terrible job on community consultation, remembering that a lot of the projects that have been built already or are being built right now were approved under the previous government.
I think it’s fair that a lot of those communities say, we weren’t consulted by the Liberals and Nationals on the projects that they approved.
The issue of consultation has reared as a major concern under the Coalition’s nuclear plan, with the opposition saying they would engage in a two-year process but conceding the local communities wouldn’t get a say in whether they actually housed a nuclear reactor. David Littleproud and Ted O’Brien have said they would build a nuclear plant in those towns regardless, with the consultation likely to be more about what incentives or benefits the communities would reap from the energy plant.
Plibersek went on:
Chris Bowen as energy minister has put an enormous effort into improving community consultation around renewables projects, and in turn, making sure that communities that host these projects actually benefit from them.
I can tell you there’s a lot of farmers in particular that are keen to host renewable energy projects on their land because they know that it is a consistent source of income for a farm, even in the bad years when the rains aren’t falling and the crops aren’t growing … We need to make sure that communities are feeling the benefits of those projects.
Updated
‘His nuclear shambles is economic insanity’: Chalmers sets the tone
Earlier on ABC News Breakfast, Jim Chalmers made clear where the government was taking the nuclear lines this week (see if you can pick the line of the day):
You know, this is a very dangerous approach from Peter Dutton and the Liberals to a very serious issue.
His nuclear shambles is economic insanity for Australia, and every time they speak about this nuclear shambles it raises more questions than it answers.
We already know that the economics of nuclear power for Australia is absolute madness. It takes longer, it costs more to build, it will push up energy prices for Australians, it will create extreme investor uncertainty and it will squander Australia’s unique combination of advantages when it comes to becoming a renewable energy superpower and nailing this net zero energy transformation in our economy.
So from beginning to end, this is a complete and utter nuclear shambles, it is economic insanity to go down the path that Peter Dutton is proposing.
He can’t even provide the most basic details. So he’s gone for the most divisive option, he’s divided his party, he can’t provide key details, and he wants Australians to believe that somehow by building nuclear reactors in the second half of the 2030s will have an impact on power prices in the middle of the 2020s, and that’s why it’s all falling in a heap around him.
… And that’s why this has turned into a complete and utter nuclear shambles.
Updated
‘There’s no overarching national plan’ on housing, Pocock says
David Pocock also spoke to the ABC about his private member’s bill that would see housing treated as a human right. He said it was needed because:
There’s no overarching national plan and this would legislate that these are the objectives, we want to see housing affordable, we want to reduce homelessness and then it would be up to the government to actually work out – how are we going to do that?
What are the policies that we think will address this?
At the moment, you know, the government comes up with a plan, there’s no accountability after an election, things, you know – a new government comes in, they turf out the old work.
We need a long-term commitment to turning this around. There are no silver bullets. We need every sort of policy lever but importantly for that to come from, yes, the government public servants, but also experts and people experiencing the housing crisis, whether it’s people coming into the budget to buy or renters dealing with a tight rental market and frankly awful renters’ right in this country.
Updated
Pocock hits back at Littleproud as things get heated in nuclear debate
You can always tell when politicians are a little under pressure, because things tend to become personal pretty quickly.
The Coalition (those of the “if you don’t know, vote no” campaign with the voice) have become very upset over the Labor party’s use of Simpsons’ memes to criticise the fledgling nuclear policy, with Peter Dutton calling Anthony Albanese a “child in a man’s body”.
Meanwhile the Nationals leader, David Littleproud, has launched an attack on the teal independents, accusing them of “dripping with self-righteous sanctimony” because nothing says uniting Australia like once again pitting city and country residents against each other (Nationals leaders have a habit of forgetting that many people who live in city electorates grew up in the regions and still have family and connection there).
The independent senator David Pocock was asked about Littleproud’s criticism and said:
One of my heroes Desmond Tutu used to say ‘don’t raise your voice, improve your argument’.
It’s pretty tragic the major parties tear the opposition down rather than improving their argument and making their plans stand on their own two feet.
I have been working with the member for Indi, Dr Helen Haines. She brings a regional perspective and it is in good faith. It is really putting regional communities front and centre when it comes to the energy transition.
I have been to David Littleproud’s electorate. I have been to a number of Nationals electorates and talked to farmers, to regional communities, on big pieces of legislation that come through this place. I’m committed to consultation.
As an independent, I don’t get told how to vote. I have to make my mind up based on what I’m hearing from people who are going to be affected, people in the ACT, what’s important to them and speaking to experts. We know regional communities are going to be hardest-hit by climate change. The farmers that the Nationals represent, their profit is down by 20% [on] the year 2000. We have to have a plan not to just mitigate climate change through the transition, but to invest in adaptation. I don’t see a plan, a credible plan, for either of those from the Nationals which is a real shame.
Updated
Chalmers says grocery code will benefit suppliers of fresh produce
Stepping away from the nuclear debate for a moment: treasurer Jim Chalmers will be introducing legislation to make the grocery code of conduct mandatory.
Chalmers says the legislation will:
Make the code mandatory for all supermarkets with an annual Australian revenue of greater than $5bn
Strengthen formal and informal dispute-resolution arrangements
Introduce penalties for the more harmful breaches of the code with the maximum penalty the greatest of $10m, three times the benefit gained from the contravening conduct or 10% of turnover in the preceding 12 months.
Create an anonymous supplier and whistle-blower complaints mechanism within the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission
Place greater emphasis on addressing fear of retribution
Improve outcomes for suppliers of fresh produce
So with a fine of up to 10% of revenue that is incentive to treat suppliers better. But there isn’t a lot of information on how the legislation will ensure lower prices for consumers.
Updated
Plibersek on nature laws: ‘Where we’re headed is better environmental protections’
On to something that is in Tanya Plibersek’s portfolio, the environment minister is asked about the proposed federal environment protection agency and whether or not the government has the support of the Greens to get it through the Senate.
Plibersek:
Our reforms to the Environment Protection Biodiversity Conservation Act are in three parts. We passed the first tranche of laws at the end of last year when we established the nature repair market and expanded what’s called the water trigger, which is the part of the environment laws that protect water sources from mining projects.
The second tranche of our legislation will establish, as you say, for the first time in Australia, a new environment protection agency that will significantly increase penalties for wrongdoing in the environment.
It will provide the opportunity for stop-work orders under environmental laws. It’ll do a number of other really important things.
That’s the second tranche of our laws which are in the parliament right now.
And then the third tranche of our laws, we continue to consult on this huge rewrite of our entire Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, which runs 2,000 pages, but it’s very clear where we’re going.
Professor Graeme Samuel reviewed the legislation in the previous government. In response to that Samuel review, we put out our nature positive plan, which goes into the detail of where we’re headed and where we’re headed is better environmental protections, more protection for nature and faster, clearer decisions for business
Updated
‘We are very confident … that we’ve got sufficient gas’: Plibersek
Q: There are major concerns of a gas shortage on the east coast reports are saying it’s in part due to a slump in the output from wind power. Is that your understanding?
Tanya Plibersek:
Oh, look, that’s really a question for Chris Bowen, the energy minister. But as we’ve said, we know we have a future gas strategy. It says that gas will be an important part of our energy mix.
Through the time to come and of course we still need gas for industrial uses as well.
We want to be able to manufacture steel and cement and industrial chemicals and so on here in Australia and that gas is a really important part of those industrial processes/
Q: A consulting group says the yield from major windfarms across the national electricity market is the worst in the last five years. Is that your understanding?
Plibersek:
Well, like I say, I’m the environment minister, not the energy minister. So that’s a question for Chris Bowen.
Q: Is Victoria at risk of running out of gas this winter?
Plibersek:
Again, that’s a Chris Bowen question, not an environment approvals question. But we are very confident that with the gas reservations we’ve put in place, that we’ve got sufficient gas.
Updated
Plibersek on renewables and power prices: ‘We’re only two years into the transition’
A listener texts in to ask: if renewables are so cheap, why does my power bill keep going up?
Tanya Plibersek says:
Well, because we’re only two years into the transition. So we’ve seen a 25% increase in renewables in the grid so far, we’re not at 82% yet, but you only have to look, I mean, there’s so many examples around the world.
If you look at Ontario and Quebec, you know, neighbours in Canada, Ontario has got nuclear, it’s got more expensive energy. Quebec’s 86% renewable, it’s got cheaper energy. There’s so many examples of that.
There’s a reason that 330,000 Australians put solar panels on their roof last year. We’ve got more than 3m Australian homes that have got solar panels on the roof, not because it’s more expensive, not because they’re all … greenies. It’s because it brings down power bills.
Updated
Asked to describe Labor’s energy policy, Tanya Plibersek says:
Our policy is to maximise cheaper, cleaner renewable energy in our grid, but we acknowledge … our target is 82% renewable energy that’s still 18% coming from elsewhere.
We’ve made it clear that gas will have a role, particularly in the transition to more renewable energy, right through to 2050.
Well, we are hoping that green hydrogen is another energy source that will come on stream but that’s not commercial at the moment.
We’re investing to make sure that it becomes commercial. But 82% renewable energy is an incredible transformation in our energy grid.
Updated
‘They know that their proposal for nuclear energy is expensive and unattainable’
The environment minister, Tanya Plibersek, is speaking to the ABC’s RN Breakfast about the Coalition’s nuclear policy, as well as the news she has approved 54 renewables projects (this is not a surprise, as it was 51 just a few weeks ago).
The Coalition’s nuclear policy has prompted the government to go hard on its renewables projects.
Plibersek says the nuclear debate is part of a wider campaign:
They’re inflating the costs of the transition. They’re inflating the figures like the kilometres of transmission lines and so on. Because they know that their proposal for nuclear energy is expensive and unattainable.
Updated
Chris Bowen on nuclear: ‘It’s hard to think of a bigger potential act of economic self harm’
The energy minister, Chris Bowen, has written an op-ed for the Australian Financial Review where he makes his views on the Coalition’s nuclear gambit clear:
The Coalition are clear in their aims. The alternative Deputy Prime Minister boasts that they will impose a cap on renewable energy investment and engineer a pause in renewables. His promise to rip up offshore wind contracts is an attack on international investment and the local communities that will rely on this energy to power industry and keep jobs.
It’s hard to think of a bigger potential act of economic self harm.
Stopping the rollout of renewables will have one impact: it will keep coal fired power in our grid for longer. Much longer. Of course this is bad news for emissions. But it’s bad news for reliability as we can’t be relying on ageing coal fired power stations and kid ourselves that they will become more reliable as they age. It’s bad news for your wallet because coal fired power is more expensive than renewables.
Updated
Good morning
Welcome back to politics live where we will cover the last sitting fortnight before all the MPs abandon Canberra for the winter break.
The winter session is usually a little chaotic for that very reason – lots to get through before the spring – but this one will be even more messy than usual as the major parties go toe-to-toe over the Coalition’s nuclear “plan”.
We say “plan” because other than identifying seven privately owned sites, there’s not a lot of other information. We still don’t know the cost, where the technology will come from, how the Coalition proposes to overcome state objections, how it would acquire the sites given the lack of interest in selling, whether any geographical surveys have been completed ensuring the sites are suitable for nuclear or how any of it would happen before 2035. (And that’s just the start of the questions).
To win the next election, the Coalition needs to win 18 seats. Eighteen. That’s assuming it doesn’t lose any. Which then raises the question of why it’s going all out on a policy that won’t win it back seats it lost on climate issues at the last election.
The former prime minister Paul Keating thinks he knows the answer:
Dutton, like Abbott, will do everything he can to de-legitimise renewables and stand in the way of their use as the remedy nature has given us to underwrite our life on Earth.
Only the most wicked and cynical of individuals would foist such a blight on an earnest community like Australia.
A community which fundamentally believes in truth and decency and which relies on its political system to advance those ideals.
The issue is expected to dominate the sitting.
Meanwhile, in the Senate, the upper chamber will be pushed to get through a raft of legislation as it returns after Senate estimates.
The independent senator David Pocock will be introducing another bill into the mix to “require adequate housing to be treated as a human right for every Australian by mandating that the Federal Government make a long-term plan to transform Australia’s dysfunctional housing system”.
It’s a one-two from the independents on the crossbench – Pocock will introduce it in the Senate while Kylea Tink (with Helen Haines as seconder) introduces it in the lower house. It’s another attempt to put housing front and centre on the agenda given that the cost-of-living crisis is sending more people into insecure housing with no immediate answers on how to address the problem.
You’ll have Paul Karp, Daniel Hurst, Sarah Basford Canales, Josh Butler and Karen Middleton covering all the Canberra happenings for you, with the entire Guardian brains trust at your disposal.
Amy Remeikis is with you on the blog for most of the day. It’s already second coffee time.
Ready? Let’s get into it.
Updated
