|
senate vote 2019-11-12#4
Edited by
mackay staff
on
2020-07-24 12:52:39
|
Title
Bills — Treasury Laws Amendment (Prohibiting Energy Market Misconduct) Bill 2019; in Committee- Treasury Laws Amendment (Prohibiting Energy Market Misconduct) Bill 2019 - in Committee - Coal-fired generators
Description
<p class="speaker">Sarah Hanson-Young</p><p>by leave—I move the remaining amendments of the Greens, (1) to (3) on sheet 8798, together:</p><p class="italic">(1) Schedule 1, item 1, page 21 (after line 3), at the end of subsection 153X(1), add:</p>- The majority voted against [amendments](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2019-11-12.26.1) introduced by SA Senator [Sarah Hanson-Young](https://theyvoteforyou.org.au/people/senate/sa/sarah_hanson-young) (Greens), which means they failed.
- Senator Hanson-Young [explained that](https://www.openaustralia.org.au/senate/?gid=2019-11-12.26.1) "*These amendments relate specifically to the major concern that people have in relation to this bill and the motivation of the government: that it is to make it harder for the Liddell Power Station to close.*"
- ### Amendments text
- > *(1) Schedule 1, item 1, page 21 (after line 3), at the end of subsection 153X(1), add:*
- >
- >> *Note: An order cannot be made under this section if it would have the effect of inhibiting, delaying or stopping a planned closure of a coal-fired generator: see section 153ZE.*
- >
- > *(2) Schedule 1, item 1, page 25 (after line 26), at the end of subsection 153ZB(1), add:*
- >
- >> *Note: An order cannot be made under this section if it would have the effect of inhibiting, delaying or stopping a planned closure of a coal-fired generator: see section 153ZE.*
- >
- > *(3) Schedule 1, item 1, page 28 (after line 19), at the end of Division 7, add:*
- >
- >> *153ZE No orders under this Part that would affect planned closure of coal - fired generator etc.*
- >>
- >> *Despite Divisions 5 and 6, an order must not be made in relation to a body corporate under either of those Divisions if the order would have the effect of inhibiting, delaying or stopping a planned closure of a coal-fired generator.*
<p class="italic">Note: An order cannot be made under this section if it would have the effect of inhibiting, delaying or stopping a planned closure of a coal-fired generator: see section 153ZE.</p><p class="italic">(2) Schedule 1, item 1, page 25 (after line 26), at the end of subsection 153ZB(1), add:</p><p class="italic">Note: An order cannot be made under this section if it would have the effect of inhibiting, delaying or stopping a planned closure of a coal-fired generator: see section 153ZE.</p><p class="italic">(3) Schedule 1, item 1, page 28 (after line 19), at the end of Division 7, add:</p><p class="italic">153ZE No orders under this Part that would affect planned closure of coal - fired generator etc.</p><p class="italic">Despite Divisions 5 and 6, an order must not be made in relation to a body corporate under either of those Divisions if the order would have the effect of inhibiting, delaying or stopping a planned closure of a coal-fired generator.</p><p>These amendments relate specifically to the major concern that people have in relation to this bill and the motivation of the government: that it is to make it harder for the Liddell Power Station to close. We know that this bill is being used as part of the government's broader bully tactics against AGL to force them to keep Liddell open rather than to close it, despite the fact that all of the evidence, all of the advice and all of the expertise shows that, if we are to start reducing pollution, if we are to meet the Paris Agreement, if we are to get well and truly on the way to net zero emissions by 2050, we are going to have to start closing some of these older coal-fired power stations. If this bill is to pass, which it will because of the support that the Labor Party are giving the government, we don't want to see it being used to override decisions and announcements that are already made.</p><p>We heard Senator McAllister speak in relation to the previous sheet of Greens amendments, saying that it wasn't in direct relation to the bill. Well, this one clearly is. You can't run that argument on this one, because this is precisely related to allowing for AGL to ensure that they can do what it is that they have said—that's to retire Liddell because it is old, because we need to be reducing pollution and because it's just simply not efficient any longer to be keeping it open.</p><p>We know that what this bill is about. Despite all the dressing up and window-dressing in relation to this being about lowering power bills, we've heard directly from government members in the House of Representatives debate that this bill is all about sticking it to AGL because of their decision to close Liddell and to retire what is a coughing and spluttering clunker of a coal-fired power station.</p><p>This amendment is important, because the last thing we want to see is the government dogged by the ideological battle inside their party room between those who don't understand the science of climate change and those who do—and there are some. I'll pay credit to that. There are plenty of people inside the Liberal Party who understand the science of climate change, but there are others who have their heads so deep in the sand that they have no idea what is coming in terms of the huge impact that global warming is bringing to our communities and to the future of this planet. They think that, as long as they keep talking about how much they love coal, everything will be okay. The fight and the ideological war inside the Liberal and National parties should not stop this country moving forward towards a clean renewable energy future. It certainly shouldn't. The ideological war inside the Liberal-National coalition should not be used to bully AGL and in fact other companies who are rightly seeing the writing on the wall. They want to transition out of coal because they can see that it doesn't make smart business sense and it doesn't make environmental sense.</p><p>Climate change is already here on our doorstep and there is a moral obligation to act. So let's put this amendment in place, even if it's just to help the Prime Minister deal with some of those dinosaurs in his own party who think that loving coal, at any cost, is the only way forward. This amendment is important if we are to transition to get coal out of the system and to ensure that companies like AGL can make smart business choices without the fear of being bullied by the government of the day.</p> <p class="speaker">Jenny McAllister</p><p>Labor won't be supporting this amendment. I am horrified by the approach taken by the government to the energy system. I am horrified by the continual discussion about direct investment and public money being applied to new or old coal-fired power stations. I think the approach that they are taking is ad hoc, political and totally failing the public. But the solution proposed by the Greens in this amendment doesn't deal with the material problem in this bill, the Treasury Laws Amendment (Prohibiting Energy Market Misconduct) Bill 2019. In Labor's view, the role of the ACCC and of the courts set out in the legislation that is actually before us in the chamber appropriately removes ministerial discretion and adequately addresses these concerns. On that basis, we won't be supporting the amendment.</p> <p class="speaker">Amanda Stoker</p><p>The question is that the amendments be agreed to.</p><p>Progress reported</p>
|