Tuesday, 12 August 2025

 Tim BULL (Gippsland East) (14:39): My question is to the Premier. Phil and Melissa Nielsen own a laundromat in Orbost, a town struggling after Labor’s decision to close the timber industry. The Nielsens have connected the business to compressed natural gas, or CNG as it is better known, at a cost of $40,000. They will now be cut off due to the pending closure of the CNG network. Transitioning to LPG is unaffordable for them in the longer term. Why has the government decided to close the CNG network across the 10 regional towns 10 years early without providing sufficient compensation, costing regional Victorians like the Nielsens?

 Jacinta ALLAN (Bendigo East – Premier) (14:40): I want to, from the outset, acknowledge that the township of Orbost is a great community. It is part of a number of small communities in East Gippsland who are such an important part of regional and rural Victoria. But I want to be clear with their local member that his claim that it is the government’s action that has resulted in the change in the delivery of CNG to this community is wrong. It is wrong, and I will outline the reasons why. Both the current and former leaders of the National Party will remember this well. In 2010 the National Party made a commitment to extend the natural gas network to a number of country communities. Over the course of their time in government they were told repeatedly by the privatised gas industry and the department themselves that that commitment was undeliverable. That commitment was undeliverable, and indeed there are briefs to the former Minister for Regional Development and Leader of the National Party that pointed out to the Leader of the National Party that the gas distribution system already extends to and beyond the point which makes economic sense for a distribution business.

Tim Bull: Speaker, my point of order is relevance. We do not need a history lesson here. The question related directly to why compensation is not being provided for those customers who are being forced to transition under an agreement with the government – providing sufficient compensation.

The SPEAKER: I ask members not to repeat the question in their points of order. The Premier was being relevant to the question, but I do ask her to come back to the specific answer.

Jacinta ALLAN: I did answer the first part of the member’s question when I corrected his claim that it was a government decision. It is important because the member for Gippsland East cannot wash away the history of why townships like Orbost and families and businesses in communities like Orbost are now faced with what is a very real challenge. That is because the former Nationals government, which the member was part of, delivered not an extension of the natural gas network. They could not do that; they were told they could not do that. Instead they went into an arrangement with a private operator to truck in gas to those communities. They did that at huge, subsidised expense. The budget of this energy for the regions program was massively overblown, but they did it. They did it against the advice of both the department and what the private network said. They delivered –

Tim Bull: Speaker, I repeat my point of order on relevance, which related to sufficient compensation being provided for these people to transition.

The SPEAKER: I ask the Premier to come back to the question that was asked.

Jacinta ALLAN: I am outlining that, because what has happened – what has gone on since natural gas has not been delivered by an extension of the network, as was committed to by the National Party ‍– is that it was being trucked to these communities, to this mother–daughter station arrangement where natural gas was then being delivered to households and businesses. My point is that, once the subsidy from the former government came off, the price of gas went up, just as was expected. So what we are doing through the work with those companies is recognising that many families and households have been left in the lurch by a failed policy from those opposite, and there are arrangements being put in place to support families during this transition.

 Tim BULL (Gippsland East) (14:45): A pensioner in Lakes Entrance switched his home to CNG and hydronic heating when Labor closed the timber industry, knowing that firewood prices would rise. The heating system alone cost him $16,000. Switching to electricity is his only viable option and will now leave him with a significant cost gap from what has been offered of another $15,000. At a time when cost of living is biting, why has the government forced this massive conversion cost on hundreds of people like this pensioner, leaving them considerably out of pocket?

 Jacinta ALLAN (Bendigo East – Premier) (14:46): I have needed some assistance in unpacking the questions from those opposite today. In terms of that specific example, the minister for energy, I know, has been working with the company. In terms of the issue, we do recognise that those communities have been left in a really difficult position, which is why, going back to the question of compensation, there is support that is being provided to those families and businesses. In addition to that, there is of course the support through the government’s electrification program, and the minister for energy has just reminded me that the Victorian energy upgrades program is available for these households and businesses. That is of course a program that those opposite voted against when given the opportunity to support the legislation in the Parliament.

Members interjecting.

The SPEAKER: Order! Member for Tarneit, off you go – an hour and a half.

Member for Tarneit withdrew from chamber.

Bridget Vallence: On a point of order, Speaker, on relevance, the question is around why the government is forcing the conversion cost onto these pensioners. I would ask you to ask the Premier to come back to that question. She is talking about other things. We need her to come back to this question.

Mary-Anne Thomas: Speaker, there is no point of order. Once again, the Manager of Opposition Business should know that a point of order is not an opportunity to re-ask a question or indeed to ask another question, which we have seen a little bit of today. The Premier was being entirely relevant to the question, and I ask that you rule the point of order out of order.

The SPEAKER: The Premier was being relevant to the question.

Jacinta ALLAN: To quote from the architect of this program, a former Leader of the National Party, he said on 30 September 2014, ‘Some said it couldn’t be done.’ He was right.