|
representatives vote 2024-09-09#6
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2024-10-06 10:25:27
|
Title
Bills — Future Made in Australia Bill 2024; Consideration in Detail- Future Made in Australia Bill 2024 - Consideration in Detail - National Interest Framework
Description
<p class="speaker">Andrew Wilkie</p><p>I move the amendment circulated in my name:</p><p class="italic">(1) Schedule 1, item 41, page 57 (after line 6), after subsection 24EA(1), insert:</p><p class="italic">(1A) Without limiting subsection (1), the statement must include recommendations for any sanctions (including parliamentary sanctions) to be imposed on the respondent.</p><p class="italic">(2) Schedule 1, item 41, page 58 (after line 6), after subsection 24EB(1), insert:</p><p class="italic">(1A) If the Privileges Committee's decision is not consistent with any recommendations made by the decision-maker or review panel (see subsection 24EA(1A)), the report mentioned in paragraph (1)(b) must:</p><p class="italic">(a) be made in writing; and</p><p class="italic">(b) set out the reasons for not following those recommendations; and</p><p class="italic">(c) be tabled in the House at the time the Committee reports it decision.</p><p>The Future Made in Australia Bill is a welcome step in the right direction from the government, one which establishes strong foundations for world-leading Australian renewable energy, manufacturing and export industries. However, at present, there is a glaring loophole in the bill that needs closing—that is, that despite being touted as a game-changing investment in clean energy industries, jobs and exports, under this legislation there is no requirement for these investments to be clean and green. The Australian Conservation Foundation notes this in their submission to the Senate inquiry into the bill. I thank them for working with me to redraft this amendment which closes the loophole by ensuring that neither stream of the national interest framework can be used to invest in or support fossil fuel, nuclear power or carbon capture and storage.</p><p>My constituents in Tasmania and, indeed, millions of Australians right across the country, know we're running out of time to reduce emissions and mitigate the worst of the impacts of climate change. As I said before many times, the fossil fuel industry is rapidly strangling our planet and it is past time this government acted with urgency on the climate emergency. It is simply unconscionable that Australia is currently one of the largest exporters of fossil fuels in the world. In fact, we are currently third behind Russia and the United States. It seems all this government has done so far is double down, but most Australian know it makes neither environmental nor economic sense to continue to approve and invest in fossil fuel exploration, exploitation and infrastructure. Even the International Energy Agency tells us that oil, gas and coal demand is expected to peak this decade, which means fossil fuel projects are rapidly becoming stranded assets. At the same time, at COP-28 just last year, world leaders agreed to accelerate efforts towards net zero in a just, orderly and equitable way.</p><p>It has become all too clear that neither the climate crisis nor the economic reality leave room for continued misguided investments in fossil fuels. That's why my amendment ensures that they aren't eligible for support and investment under the Future Made in Australia framework. The same goes for carbon capture and storage. To be clear, I don't object to the technology in principle but do I hold concerns that, in its current state, it's unproven, and, in too many cases, it is used an expensive smoke screen to hide the continued extraction and burning of fossil fuels.</p><p>The last issue my amendment deals with is nuclear power. It's increasingly clear that when talking about a clean net zero future made in Australia, nuclear can't be a part of the solution. We have seen report after report saying nuclear is too slow and too costly to play any significant role in Australia's transition to net zero, not to mention the risks associated with waste management. No. Instead, we need to be prioritising our efforts and seizing on our natural advantages to ensure we don't throw good money after bad. I'm optimistic about these advantages and I'm optimistic about our ability to pull off a just transition and meet our net zero commitments.</p><p>Australians know there is so much opportunity for us in the energy transition because we're blessed with abundant clean energy resources and we have a highly skilled and educated workforce. In other words, we have what it takes to be a clean energy super power and to lead the world in this economic and environmental transition. The potential benefits for job creation and skills development, local communities and the environment are obvious to anyone paying attention. We in this place need to make sure it's set up and powered by renewable energy industries and not off the back of continued investment in climate-wrecking fossil fuels or greenwashed non-solutions such as nuclear and carbon capture and storage.</p><p>I would love to believe we can trust this and future governments not to use this legislation to prop up climate-damaging industries but I've been around long enough to know that trust in government is built on solid mechanisms of transparency and accountability. That's exactly what my amendment provides for, and I urge all members to support it.</p> <p class="speaker">Milton Dick</p><p>The question before the House is: the amendment moved by the honourable member for Clark be agreed to.</p><p></p><p></p> -
- The majority voted against [amendments](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/debate/?id=2024-09-09.40.1) introduced by Clark MP [Andrew Wilkie](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/representatives/clark/andrew_wilkie) (Independent), which means they failed.
- ### Amendment text
- > *Clause 7, page 9 (after line 14), at the end of the clause, add:*
- >
- >> *(5) However, a sector of the Australian economy will not align with the National Interest Framework in the net zero transformation stream or the economic resilience and security stream if:*
- >>
- >>> *(a) the sector engages in, or has the overarching purpose of, supporting the exploration, prospecting, discovery, development, production or extraction of fossil fuels; or*
- >>>
- >>> *(b) the sector engages in, or has the overarching purpose of, supporting the installation, commission, operation or maintenance of a power station that uses an energy source that is not an eligible renewable energy source (within the meaning of section 17 of the Renewable Energy (Electricity) Act 2000 ); or*
- >>>
- >>> *(c) the sector is a technology for carbon capture and storage (within the meaning of the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007 ); or*
- >>>
- >>> *(d) the sector develops or supports nuclear actions (within the meaning of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 ), other than a sector that engages in or supports nuclear installations (within the meaning of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 ); or*
- >>>
- >>> *(e) the sector constructs, installs, commissions, operates or maintains infrastructure for the primary purpose of engaging in an activity mentioned in paragraph (a), (b), (c) or (d).*
- >>>
- >>> *Note: In relation to paragraph (d), an example of nuclear installations is nuclear medicine.*
-
-
|