Legislative Council, Thursday 23 May 2024

Ms FORREST (Murchison) - Mr President, I move -

(1) That a Joint Select Committee be appointed with power to send for persons and papers, with leave to sit during any adjournment of either House and with leave to adjourn from place to place to inquire into and report upon energy prices and related matters in Tasmania with the following Terms of Reference -
     (a) Factors that impact energy prices for Tasmanian household and small and medium business customers, with particular reference to energy generation, distribution and retail costs.

     (b) The challenges related to energy supply and energy costs in Tasmania including -
         (i) as owners of power generation and transmission infrastructure;
        (ii) structure and operations of State-owned energy entities;

        (iii) energy requirements;
        (iv) expansion of State-owned renewable energy generation including associated community and economic benefits;
        (v) private energy generators;
        (vi) energy generation, storage and transmission capacity; and
        (vii) energy security considerations.

     (c) Opportunities related to energy supply and energy costs in Tasmania including -
        (i) as owners of power generation and transmission infrastructure;
        (ii) structure and operations of State-owned energy entities;
       (iii) energy requirements;
       (iv) expansion of State-owned renewable energy generation including associated community and economic benefits;
       (v) private energy generators;
      (vi) energy generation, storage and transmission capacity; and
      (vii) energy security considerations.

   (d) The operation of the National Electricity Market including -
     (i) current and future energy demand for participants; and
     (ii) costs, benefits, opportunities and risks associated with the renewable energy transition.

  (e) Tasmania’s past and future participation in the National Electricity Market including costs and benefits to Tasmania and resource opportunity.

  (f) Marinus Link Pty Ltd and associated energy power developments (Battery of the Nation and North West Transmission Development) including -
   (i) likely beneficiaries;
   (ii) funding arrangements, including the potential for private sector contribution;
   (iii) impact on Tasmanians’ energy bills and concessional pricing arrangements; and
   (iv) alternative options and associated costs and/or benefits to Tasmania including costs and cost of a ‘do nothing approach’.

  (g) Any other matters incidental thereto.

(2) That the said Committee be authorised to receive all submissions received by the Legislative Council Sessional Committee Government Administration ‘A’ Inquiry into Energy Prices in Tasmania from the Third Session of the Fiftieth Parliament.

(3) That the said Committee be authorised to receive all submissions and related correspondence and papers received by the Joint Select Committee on Energy Matters from the Third Session of the Fiftieth Parliament.

(4) That the number of Members to serve on the said Committee on the part of the Legislative Council be four. 

Mr President, I will speak in broad terms to this motion as I am just waiting for some amendments to the motion to be circulated and also a marked-up version of the motion for members so that they can easily see how the proposed amendments fit into it.

I will first speak to the broad intent of this motion. I am not going to read it all, I did that the other day; it took long enough.

This motion is to effectively re-establish two committees as one. Members in this place will remember the young member for Pembroke made a speech on this motion when he sought to establish it as a committee, as part of his commitment to his community, to look at the matters relating to energy prices, how it actually works and about the impact they are having. That remains a very live issue at the moment, despite commitments the federal government made in the federal budget and indeed, in our own bill we debated yesterday, the supplementary appropriation bill.

It will help as an interim measure. People of Tasmania have asked for some time for a better understanding of how all this works. One of the most transparent and open ways to understand all this is for a parliamentary committee to inquire into these matters.

In terms of compressing that committee and a joint House Committee - which members will remember was proposed in the lower House from a member down there and sent up here, which we agreed to and that was quite a complex and convoluted in some respect terms of reference, which remains pretty much the same here. Working with the minister's advisers, I have agreed to try to compress it slightly more and make it more relevant to Tasmania, particularly noting some of the changes that have happened in the energy sector since that committee was established. There is not wholesale change to these terms of reference, particularly because we received just before prorogation a significant number of very complicated and dense submissions.

On prorogation of Parliament, I have received a number of phone calls from key stakeholders saying basically we spent hours and hours preparing these submissions. What now? And I said what happens now is everything stops, frustratingly so because the committee was raring to go; we had all these dates booked in. The members for Huon and Pembroke could attest to this, that we had all these dates booked in for hearings and other related matters and it all just stopped. I assured those people as best as I could I would seek to re-establish the committee.

It made sense that three of the members in this House that are on both committees; the member for Huon, member for Pembroke and myself were on both. It seemed much more sensible to now compress them when we had that opportunity to do so. When the joint House committee was proposed, our committee was already on foot up here. It was difficult then to try to compress them at that stage. What the motion is before you and I hope the amendments are coming around in a moment - have they been emailed? They have been emailed. Members will have it on their e-mail, but we will get hard copies for you and for the clerks. Yes. I will have to read it when I get it. I will wait until I get the hard copy to read in. Essentially, what we have done is taken the first term of reference from the select committee that we had here. The other aspects of that committee in terms of reference have been incorporated into other sections of this motion. I assured those who contacted me I would make every endeavour to re-establish this committee.

It is a matter of great public importance. Yes, it is a complicated area and it is an area that is a fairly rapidly moving feast. As we heard in the briefing this morning, the new arrangements regarding Marinus Link, which is named up in this motion, have changed. They changed during the caretaker period, which did raise a few eyebrows, not just for me, but for others involved in that sector, without any further information other than this has happened. It is now a stand-alone entity owned by the federal government, the Commonwealth government, the Victorian government and Tasmanian government. Not in equal shares, but as Tasmania owns 17 per cent, it is still a significant amount in terms of the size of our potential benefit to this link, should it be built.

Anyway, there is still a whole heap of water to go under the bridge there in terms of the final investment decision and other matters. But I do appreciate that briefing this morning, and all members who were there would have, to actually understand some of what is going on in the background. But rest assured, if this committee is re-established, Renewables Climate and Future Industries Tasmania will be one of the first people fronting up to go through it all again, but do it on the record so members of the public can hear how those matters proceeded and how they worked.

The amendments are now being circulated in hard copy with a marked-up version. You will see it does not actually change the substance of the motion at all; it just streamlines it somewhat. Before I speak further to it, I will move the amendment.

Before I start, I sincerely apologise for the lateness of this as well. I was only informed this morning that there were some concerns from the government side - not necessarily concerns, but wanting to perhaps update them to better reflect the current reality and also to streamline them a little bit with a particular focus on the Tasmanian side of it and the impact on Tasmania.

In good faith we negotiated quite rapidly this morning. Subsequently, it has taken a while to get this out to you and, hence, the reason I have also included for you - and thank you to the Leader's advisers for preparing the marked up version. I did not do that while I was listening to the speech, other people did it. Thank you. It does reflect what I agreed to change in this.

I will move the four amendments.

The first amendment paragraph 1(b) delete (1) and (2) insert instead, (1) role and participation of state owned energy entities.

The second amendment should read: paragraph (1)(c), delete (1) and (2)

Insert instead: 'the role and participation of state owned energy entities'.

I am making it clear that we are talking about the energy entities, not any other entity. And good pick up from the Clerk. Thank you. The third and fourth amendments remain unchanged.

In terms of the changes to paragraphs (1)(b) and (1)(c), those two are being compressed into a much more comprehensive and logical - in some respects - move to the role and participation of the state owned energy entities. They are the owners and operators of our generation and transmission; they are natural monopolies, if you like. The two changes are consistent.

The reason the terms of reference spell out the challenges in one term of reference and the opportunity in another is that when I do in terms of reference for a committee I am always focused on the reporting to make it easy to report. Whilst it is a bit of duplication, it does make the reporting much easier and the work of people putting submissions in to separate out their thoughts on both challenges and opportunities rather than blur them all together sometimes.

It is basically repetitive on that point, but (1)(b) looks at the challenges and (1)(c) looks at the opportunities.

I hope that the changes that have been made and the purpose for which they have been made are clear. It does not remove any of the underlying principles of the original motion and committee terms of reference. The submissions that were received prior to the prorogation of parliament will all still fit neatly within those current terms of reference.

I would imagine that if the committee is supported and re established that all those people would be offered the opportunity to update their submissions because things have changed and they may wish to add other comments, but that is a matter for the committee, should it be established. I do have the right of reply, so if anyone has questions about it I am happy to take those as we move forward.