Energy for the Future Bill 2014 (Debating)

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

The energy-efficiency is a separate component to the research and development component.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Senator, the research doesn't advocate for the expansion of nuclear or natural gas. It is highlighting that we cannot ignore them if we are talking about short-medium term options. We cannot suddenly create wholesale renewables supply like that.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I respect Senator Cranberry's concerns about nuclear. But I do think we need to be realistic. The reality is that nuclear is there and whether we like it or not, it is a way to reduce reliance on fossil fuels, especially coal, until the renewables can be brought online as a wholesale load of the electricity mix. Wind, solar, geo-thermal etc are not going to become wholesale load in the short-term. That's a reality, so we do need to be pragmatic.

I would also stress that my intention is that the NEF fund the household credits and increases to the value and eligibility of existing low-income support. But if you'd like to have a separate element that deals with increasing government R&D, I'm open to it.

So I'm not sure I can support the amendment until Senator TNF can clarify his intention.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I would just say nuclear energy is the long-term energy solution right in front of our noses.

Fusion-based nuclear power, yes. Fisson-based power, not so much.

And Polnut, I was under the assumption that this bill was about research and development. At least that's what I got from my reading of it. What am I off on there?

It's both - but the NEF is designed to fund the increased household support (low-income heating supplements and household energy efficiency grants) - not R&D. The first section deals with compelling suppliers to focus a set amount of their pre-tax profits to R&D. If they don't, then there is a tax penalty that goes into the NEF pool.  But I'm happy to add a

Plus there's no evidence at all that the carbon tax is a drag on the economy, it's an effective straw-man nonetheless. Plus a price signal works. Look at what happened in Australia, the period immediately after the carbon price was lifted, saw the carbon emissions increase to the highest level in 8 years.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I'd be interested to see what others think of this amendment

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

The problem with Senator TNF's amendment is that it does not reflect the current intention of the Bill. The issue with Deus' amendment is that it removes corporate responsibility from the mechanism.

So I'm happy to juggle the numbers of the R&D component, otherwise the amendment from Senator Deus is unfriendly.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Senator Yankee - do you have amendments or suggestions? I'm happy to entertain reasonable amendments as friendly.

Mind you, I'm also a little concerned about the straw-man of the carbon price being some kind of  unilateral action that has no connection to any other kind of global action. Considering China was raised, it is important to note that large tracts of China will have a carbon tax in place by next year.

It is us playing our role and taking action early benefits us in the long-term. We have the capacity to do something and continue to build and develop our economy.

This action considers a simple issue - we have a source of revenue that creates a price signal. There are issues about needing to expand eligibility and increase the value of low-income support for heating, as well as creating credits to enable households to undertake their own energy-efficiency activities, including self-generation, that can actually make households money.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

NAY

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

So I'm happy to juggle the numbers of the R&D component, otherwise the amendment from Senator Deus is unfriendly.

Would you be willing to amend the figure to 5%?

How about phased over three years?
5% -> 7.5% -> 10%

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Senators, here is my amended Bill, reflecting discussions.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I would like this to be considered as an amendment.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

I move a for a final vote on the current version.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

AYE

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Up to 35%... that's probably pushing it.

Let me think on it.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

How does the President feel about the current draft?

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

35% does seem excessive... but it is determined at the maximum. I'm fine with it.

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

Let's do it

[Fmr President & Senator Polnut]

AYE