Thursday, 5 March 2026

 The ACTING SPEAKER (Nathan Lambert) (16:14): I have received a message from the Legislative Council agreeing to the Energy and Other Legislation Amendment (Resilience Reforms and Other Matters) Bill 2026 with amendments.

Ordered that amendments be taken into consideration immediately.

Message from Council relating to following amendments considered:

1.   Clause 1, page 2, after line 9 insert –

“(ba) to amend the Electricity Industry Act 2000 to make further provision in relation to the compulsory acquisition of easements which are, or may be, required for the purposes of erecting or laying power lines (or both) and maintaining power lines; and”.

2.   Clause 2, line 20, after “5,” insert “section 12A,”.

3.   Insert the following New Clause to follow clause 12 –

‘12A Power to acquire easements with approval of Governor in Council

(1) In section 86(1) of the Electricity Industry Act 2000, after “easement” insert “which is, or may be, required”.

(2) After section 86(2) of the Electricity Industry Act 2000 insert –

“(2A)   Nothing in section 8C(1) of the Environment Effects Act 1978 prevents –

(a)   the Governor in Council approving an acquisition of an easement under this section; or

(b)   the acquisition of an easement under this section.”.’.

 Lily D’AMBROSIO (Mill Park – Minister for Climate Action, Minister for Energy and Resources, Minister for the State Electricity Commission) (16:15): I move:

That the amendments be agreed to.

We know that climate change is having an increased impact on our lives and our infrastructure. We have seen it just this summer. In January alone we experienced widespread bushfires, a flash flood and record temperatures over several days. These extreme and catastrophic conditions have impacted our electricity distribution network – the poles and wires at street level, down the roads of farms and right across all communities – causing a higher than usual number of power outages, more outages, in fact, and for longer. The events of this summer are just the latest in a series of extreme weather events that have led to widespread and prolonged power outages.

The bill creates obligations for electricity distribution businesses to publish five-yearly resilience plans. These plans would be submitted to Energy Safe Victoria, who will ensure that the plans are being implemented. This will force distribution businesses to spend money efficiently on upgrades that reduce outages, improve convenience for Victorians and keep the lights on. We are at a critical stage of the transition to renewable energy. Our coal-fired generators are increasingly unreliable and are set to close. We must deliver the replacement electricity capacity to keep the lights on and keep power bills as low as possible. To make this happen we must build critical new transmission infrastructure.

The amendment will enable the compulsory easement acquisition process for transmission projects to run in parallel with the environment effects statement process. The amendments do not change either process and do not take away any rights of landholders. The EES will remain a robust and independent assessment of the environmental, economic and social impacts of major infrastructure projects. However, the changes will create more certainty for landowners and bring forward completion dates for critical transmission infrastructure. We know that the sooner we connect low-cost renewables, the lower power prices will be for all Victorians. Delaying the Western Renewables Link, for example, would add more than $200 to the average household bill by 2030. Everybody pays that.

The changes will bring electricity infrastructure in line with road, rail and water infrastructure that we already have in place here in Victoria and have had for many, many years and also the longstanding arrangements that exist in New South Wales for electricity infrastructure. To be clear, it is the government’s expectation that every effort will be made to obtain voluntary agreements with landholders before compulsory acquisition is triggered. We know from the experience of New South Wales that the vast majority of easements are acquired on a voluntary basis once the compulsory acquisition process is triggered.

I would also like to acknowledge the collaborative contribution of the Victorian Greens, the Animal Justice Party and Legalise Cannabis Victoria in supporting the overall bill and these amendments, and I commend the amendments to the house.

 Matthew GUY (Bulleen) (16:19): Let us be clear: from the coalition’s point of view – we will oppose these amendments – these amendments are not about climate change; they are about completely disrespecting country Victorians. There is no doubt about it. The government are saying that they need legislation to walk onto someone’s land and begin a process of negotiation. Telling a landholder from the very start that whatever they say, at the end of the conversation there will be an acquisition process that will take place is not a level playing field. That is not treating regional country Victorians with respect. It is saying to landholders in country Victoria, who have gone through much under this government – much in the way of disrespect – ‘Your rights and lands and opinions don’t matter. Whatever you say, at the end of the conversation we are going to do what we want.’ That is not a process to make people confident that what the government wants to do is being done for the right reasons.

I submit to you, and so does the coalition, that if the government was serious about engaging country Victorians and if the government was serious about bringing country Victorians on as part of this process, then putting this kind of amendment in at the last minute, when we were told in the bill brief that there would not be a compulsory acquisition amendment or power or facilitation like this put into the legislation, shows a complete lack of respect for country Victorians.

I think country Victorians have come to know this about this government. I could talk about many things in relation to respect for country Victorians. It is outside the bill, so I will not, but I will just reference very quickly points about Murray Basin rail, which was promised and then not delivered; removing the Bunyip River railway bridge, which was promised and then not delivered; Torquay rail, which was promised and not delivered; and country roads, promised and not delivered. Potholes in country roads are the worst in Australia – promised to be fixed, not delivered. We can talk about the Commonwealth Games being promised and not delivered. Country Victorians are living with a great level of disrespect from a government who, frankly, could not care less about their points of view and could not care less about their rights as landholders. I just submit, as a metropolitan MP, that this Labor government would never put forward legislation like this for people in the metropolitan area of Melbourne. They would never –

Lily D’Ambrosio interjected.

Matthew GUY: No, I am sorry, Minister. I take your interjection up. You would never put forward legislation to say, ‘We’re just going to walk onto your land’ – out in some of the larger areas, near your electorate or north of your electorate – and just say whatever you think. ‘It’s all over. We’re coming on with a big stick to put in very large pieces.’ These are not small pieces of infrastructure. We are not talking 2 or 3 metres high. We are talking about a government that has systematically undermined through the energy policy from day one of coming in, taking away planning rights, whether it is solar, whether it is wind, whether it is whatever. I mean, at least involve country Victorians in the system. At least give them a voice in the process. But this government has said from the start, ‘No, sorry. We’ve got an agenda, and we’re going to keep to it. You don’t matter.’ This is just yet another example of saying to country Victorians under this Labor government that they do not matter to their point of view. All we say over here is to honour what you said at the very start of this process and this legislation, which is that compulsory acquisition powers would not be necessary in this legislation. That is what the government said.

Lily D’Ambrosio interjected.

Matthew GUY: Well, Minister, if you did not say that, why is it coming through as an amendment? I pick up the minister’s interjection and say that the minister says that is not the case. I simply point to the evidence of the fact that this is an amendment. It is not in the primary bill. If it was in the primary bill, then the government would have good reason to say, ‘We told you from the start.’ But they did not. And they did not tell country Victorians from the start, because it is an amendment. An amendment tells you it is a product of something after the primary legislation has been drafted, been discussed, been taken through a stakeholder process and gone through country Victorians and country members of Parliament – actually having a discussion with people who this might impact – and then been brought to the Parliament. That is not the way this amendment has come through. It has come at the last minute into the Legislative Council, moved by a minister up there and thrown in here at the last minute, at 2 minutes to midnight, or close enough, on a Thursday sitting, which says the government wants to ram it through. Come hither, it does not matter; they are going to do it. We say very clearly that we oppose this amendment. I know a number of my colleagues want to speak, and rightfully they will, because at the end of the day country Victorians have lived with a decade of disrespect, and it is time that ended.

 Nina TAYLOR (Albert Park) (16:23): It does not surprise me that those opposite do not believe in the science of climate change. I am aghast, because we know that actually it is people in regional and rural areas that cop it worst. We know that. We have absolute conviction in knowing that we want to make things better for them, let alone everyone else in the metro area. I say that candidly as someone who lives in a metro area. We know that when there are widespread bushfires, as we have had, and flash flooding and record temperatures, it is people in regional and rural areas who particularly cop it, and they cop it hard. It is all the more imperative to look after them and to make these changes. We know that catastrophic conditions have impacted on the electricity distribution network – even though those opposite do not want to know about it – causing a higher than usual number of power outages.

Peter Walsh: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, this is a debate about the amendment to the bill, not about climate change. I ask you to bring the member back to the bill and the amendment before the house, please.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Nathan Lambert): I ask the member for Albert Park to return to the amendments before the house.

Nina TAYLOR: Yes. Case in point: they do not believe in climate change. It has just been affirmed, and we can take that quote into the future.

A member interjected.

Nina TAYLOR: He said it is not about climate change; it absolutely is, and it is absolutely impacting the distribution network. We have a difference of opinion on that. We will go with the science; you can go with thoughts and feelings if you want.

This bill will force the distribution businesses to spend money on upgrades that reduce outages – surely that is a good thing. I might quote the member for Lowan:

I suggest to the government … to get on with it – that if you are going to get on with it then just do it. Have compulsory acquisitions of land and make it quick and make it fair so our people can move on … I call on Premier Allan: please, if you care about regional people, go out and do compulsory acquisition, as you would for a Melbourne project, and let our people deal with this, because the uncertainty is dividing families.

That is all the more imperative to drive these reforms forward, because giving people on the land certainly surely is a good thing – certainty for landowners – as is bringing forward completion dates for critical transmission infrastructure. I should say that the amendment moved by our government will enable the compulsory easement acquisition process for transmission projects to run in parallel with the environment effects statement process. These amendments do not change either process. We are very much considering the impacts of changes, and the EES will remain a robust and independent assessment of the environmental, economic and social impacts of major infrastructure projects, not forgetting the importance of certainty for landowners. And we know that the sooner we connect low-cost renewables, the lower power prices will be for all Victorians, not just metro but regional and rural. Delaying the Western Renewables Link will add over $200 to the average household bill. Contrary to what is proffered over there, we are thinking of all Victorians, believe me.

 Danny O’BRIEN (Gippsland South) (16:27): What a performance that was from the member for Albert Park, telling us what is good for us in regional Victoria. If this is so good and it is so good to bring certainty to transmission lines and everything, why isn’t the government proposing wind towers in Port Phillip Bay and then transmission lines right through Albert Park?

Nina Taylor interjected.

Danny O’BRIEN: You want to do that, member for Albert Park? Well, why don’t we get it happening then? This is the thing we get from this government all the time. We get this all the time: ‘Isn’t it wonderful, all the transmission lines, the solar panels and the wind towers.’ It is all easy for them to say, because they never have to put up with it in their electorates. All the costs are borne by the country and the benefits all flow to the city, and this legislation, this amendment, is appalling. For the government to spring this on the Parliament this week, to bring in compulsory acquisition powers before an environment effects statement has even been completed on a transmission line, is a disgrace.

I sat there at the bush summit in Ballarat last year, where both the Prime Minister and the Premier stood there and said to the people of regional Victoria, ‘We acknowledge we’ve got it wrong. We have been disrespectful in consultation processes on renewable energy transmission and transmission lines.’ They did that the day after they passed the VicGrid bill that threatened farmers with $12,000 fines for having the temerity to stop people coming onto their land. Now, in the dead of night we get this legislation, this amendment – this amendment that was not part of the VicGrid bill last year, that was not part of this legislation – and we get a day’s notice, member for Albert Park, that you are going to bring in these compulsory acquisition powers. What a disgrace from this government. If there is nothing to hide, why was this brought in at this short notice? If there was nothing to hide –

Tim Richardson interjected.

Danny O’BRIEN: No, member for Mordialloc. I am not settling down, because people are angry. People are angry in regional Victoria.

Members interjecting.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Nathan Lambert): Order! Member for Mordialloc, I have called for order. The Leader of the Nationals will direct his comments through the Chair.

Danny O’BRIEN: I am angry about this because the government is taking regional Victorians for fools. They are saying this is about providing certainty. Certainty – they do not want certain death to their farms and their communities from some of this stuff. If this was so important, Minister, why wasn’t it part of the bill when it was brought in? We asked that question in the briefing yesterday, and all they could give us was ‘internal government processes’. All they could give us was that. Why was the amendment not thought of before, Minister? That is the question. This is just a –

The ACTING SPEAKER (Nathan Lambert): Order! Leader of the Nationals, I have asked you to direct your comments, when speaking, through the Chair in accordance with the standing orders. I ask you to do so again.

Danny O’BRIEN: I did that, and I am picking up the comments from the minister at the table and the things that she said in her speech. The member for Albert Park and the minister are trying to say this is about climate change when it is about compulsory acquisition before an environment effects statement has even been done. They are expecting country people to agree to listen to them, to listen to their views. ‘Please put a submission into the environment effects process, but we’re still going to go ahead and compulsorily acquire your land’ – that is the disgrace that this government is doing with these amendments today.

It stands condemned. If there was nothing to hide, why was this not part of the bill last year? If there was nothing to hide, why was this not part of the bill to start with? They have hidden this and tried to sneak it through in the last couple of days, and it is no surprise that regional Victorians are going to be angry about this. The Victorian Farmers Federation has already called it out, as they should, and the government absolutely stands condemned on this.

This is a government that is running roughshod over Victorians. We have seen them already – they are boasting about how they are fast-tracking renewable energy and transmission lines in regional Victoria through the development facilitation process. What does that process do? It takes away the rights of regional Victorians. It takes away their rights to appeal these things at VCAT. Some will say that does not mean anything. I can tell you from personal experience that someone in my community appealed one of these wind farm projects at VCAT, and VCAT found in their favour because the department and the proponent had messed up. They had done the wrong thing, and the department and the government did not even pick it up. That is why VCAT is important. That is why people should have the right to oppose these things and to go to VCAT. The government took that away.

Then they brought in the National Electricity (Victoria) Amendment (VicGrid Stage 2 Reform) Bill ‍2025 last year and said if you do not let people do tests on your land, you will be fined $12,000. This is the day after the government had said it needed to treat these people with more respect, and now we get 24 hours notice that we are going to bring in compulsory acquisition even before an environment effects statement has taken place.

This is completely disrespectful to regional Victorians. It is consistent with the government’s approach over many years. Members like the member for Albert Park can stand up there and say it is all about cheaper power and climate change and all of that; there is no respect for regional Victorians on this. There is not a single chance this Labor government would do this if it was through the middle suburbs of Mordialloc or Albert Park, but they do not care about it when it is in Lowan or Ripon or outer areas in regional Victoria where the people are providing the food and fibre for this state and this nation. This is completely disrespectful, and the Nationals and Liberals will oppose this every day of the week.

 Tim RICHARDSON (Mordialloc) (16:33): Here we go, Walshy. You have belled the cat with some of the things you have said, but what an extraordinary performance that was. The aggression shown towards a female minister who has moved that amendments be agreed to was absolutely extraordinary. The behaviour from the member for Bulleen last night and the behaviour from the member for Gippsland South has been outrageous.

James Newbury: On a point of order, Acting Speaker: relevance.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Nathan Lambert): There is no point of order, but I ask the member for Mordialloc to address his comments through the Chair, as I have asked other members in this debate to do.

Tim RICHARDSON: The notion that there is not compulsory acquisition in this state or in members of Parliament’s electorates – we constantly have compulsory acquisition in Mordialloc. I will say my points, because the aggression coming across here, the level of –

Members interjecting.

Tim RICHARDSON: I am literally trying to speak to the amendments put forward here. The compulsory acquisition powers that we have in our state have applied in the Mordialloc electorate. The notion that there is not compulsory acquisition, as put forward by the member for Bulleen, does not stack up in any circumstance.

Jade Benham interjected.

Tim RICHARDSON: How many times has the compulsory acquisition law been used? In one part of my electorate it was 36 homes that we saw go, 36 homes from the community. The notion that there is no compulsory acquisition in the communities we serve – we had to manage those processes. We had to delicately support those people through those times, because they were their homes – they were literally their homes. The nuance in going through an environment effects statement (EES) like we have had in my electorate before, to go through a really difficult process – and where we have compulsory acquisition and the environment effects statements might change outcomes or alignment of critical infrastructure, sovereignty of our power in our state is what we are talking about here. We are not talking about just a phantom project that is thought up. We are talking about the sovereignty of power and assets in Victoria.

One of the most fundamental things to our future existence is ensuring power outcomes for our state. This is a sovereign risk going forward for Victorians that we need to manage. That goes directly to the heart of this issue. The compulsory acquisition frame and the journey that people will go on is a difficult process. There is a narrative that we have not experienced that. I have fronted up with my constituents that have lost their homes to major infrastructure projects. It is something that we absolutely care about. That is why we are going through the rigours and requirements of an environment effects statement. In my community that had federal oversight all the way through to maintain the highest levels of rigour and integrity in that process, and the acquisitions that people went through in that time were significant. But that is why fair compensation and support for anyone that confronts that is really important. That is what compulsory acquisition through the well-worn pathways of the state goes to. But I will go back to this as well: we cannot be in a situation in a state where for years we outsource the risks to our sovereign power needs into the future. States have to act and the Victorian government has to act, and the minister has brought that forward.

I want to read into Hansard a really important and timely comment that was made in this place. Those opposite might clue on to who this was as I go through. It was in September of last year:

I suggest to the government … to get on with it – that if you are going to get on with it then just do it. Have compulsory acquisitions of land and make it quick and make it fair so our people can move on … I call on Premier Allan: please, if you care about regional people, go out and do compulsory acquisition, as you would for a Melbourne project, and let our people deal with this, because the uncertainty is dividing families.

To the member for Lowan, I could not agree more. To the member for Lowan: this is exactly what has been asked for by someone who is powerful and has the leadership to stand up and realise that people need certainty and that the politics of this need to step aside on the compulsory acquisition, the EES, the support and the certainty for families going forward. Do you know what, I think the member for Lowan said it better than anyone.

Rather than the routine that we just got before from the Leader of the Nationals, maybe the true leader and the heart and soul of the Nationals, the member for Lowan, might stand up here and be able to give a bit of context to what was an extraordinary, aggressive outburst on something that the member for Lowan has categorised exactly in the words of the minister. I mean, what are we really doing here when we have that kind of behaviour on display and when a member of the Nationals – a leader no less, a shadow minister representing a third of the state or 40 per cent of the state – brings that forward? Did the member for Bulleen get briefed on those comments before coming in with that rant about how compulsory acquisition never happens anywhere else? Did the Leader of the Nationals –

Danny O’Brien interjected.

Tim RICHARDSON: Leader of the Nationals, I am happy to read out the quote again. I am happy to give you the quote right here, because the ‘what about’ about it –

Matthew Guy interjected.

Tim RICHARDSON: The member for Bulleen is saying that this from Hansard is out of context. Okay. That is the most extraordinary whataboutism, turn of phrase or spin that we have seen. That is the most extraordinary position we have ever seen.

Danny O’Brien: On a point of order, Acting Speaker, to assist the house I would ask the member for Mordialloc to table the entire speech that he is quoting from.

The ACTING SPEAKER (Nathan Lambert): There is no point of order.

Tim RICHARDSON: The member for Gippsland South has been here for a little while. I will give him the book of Hansard if he wants. I mean, this is extraordinary – the absolute humiliation. The red has drained from the face into then just white horror for the member for Gippsland South. He realises just how extraordinary that outburst was and how unhinged it was. The fact is that these right here are important amendments. We support the position that was put by the member for Lowan to create certainty for regional Victoria. We support the minister. I just ask those opposite in the final few seconds of my contribution: reflect on the standards you bring to this place and how you carry yourselves, because the aggression, the anger and the intimidation are absolutely outrageous. I think the Leader of the Nationals should do better.

 Roma BRITNELL (South-West Coast) (16:40): I rise to also oppose the amendments that the government has quietly, at the last minute, slipped into the Parliament, amendments that were only added to the bill after it had already passed through this house and everybody had made their contribution – and after being told at the bill briefing that the compulsory acquisition parameters would not be affected by the reforms that had already gone through the lower house in this bill. The answer we got at the bill briefing was a clear no, but that is not the case. This amendment takes away people’s ability to have fairness of process. They can now have their land compulsorily acquired before an EES, and environment effects statement, has been done. Where is the fairness and reasonableness in that? Here we are asking why this was not included in the original bill. Do you know what the answer was that we were given when we asked this just yesterday when we had this thrust upon us, after giving us reassurances some just weeks ago that it was not going to happen? They said it was due to internal government process. What the hell does that even mean? I reckon it is code for ‘We are not even going to bother to tell you.’ Victorians deserve better.

Regional Victorians do not need to be consistently ridden roughshod over by this government with this overreach, this sidestepping of checks and balances. What is the point in safeguards, environmental studies and so-called consultation if they are simply being ignored or bypassed. Decisions are being made about communities, not with them, and that is exactly why the community is so anxious in regional Victoria, because it is exactly what we are seeing. We saw it happen in South-West Coast when the federal government announced in Warrnambool and Port Fairy the offshore wind zone would be happening in 2023 before any environment effects statements had been undertaken. Now that is exactly what this state Labor government is doing as well. It is legislating down the same path, willing to ride roughshod over communities and bulldoze through anything that stands in its way. It is yet another example of a government more focused on meeting targets, which they know they are falling short of, than protecting the land that produces our food, or safeguards the whales and their migratory pathway, or their whale nursery where they give birth. This is a failure of environmental responsibility and betrayal of community trust. No wonder people are sceptical. They want to acquire land and then think about whether it is environmentally reasonable to do so.

The Liberals and Nationals will restore confidence in integrity. The member for Mordialloc talked about this being part of this amendment, helping with the highest level of integrity. I am sorry, it is the exact opposite. We have been clear, as Liberals and Nationals, that Labor’s planning changes, which centralise decision-making into the hands of the minister, must be reversed. These projects should not be controlled by Spring Street. They actually should be managed locally, where the effects are felt, and they need to be done with proper oversight and accountability. Planning amendment VC261 will be repealed. We have already sought that. We voted against it in this house once, and we remain committed to ensuring it is overturned when we get into government. We have also committed to requiring a full environment effects statement for every single low-emission energy project. If elected in November, that is exactly what we will do: a full and proper and rigorous environment effects process for each project, with no shortcuts, no exemptions. Our plan is to restore integrity, and we will give that confidence back to communities. It is essential to protect the agricultural land and the oceans and ensure that the environment and the community outcomes are genuinely considered, not treated as an afterthought.

It seems renewable energy targets are being placed above the environment, above the economy and above our whales and above our essential services. Victorians are missing out on food production. The findings from the Rotting from the Top report only confirm what communities like mine have felt for years: accountability has gone, standards have sunk, and the voices of ordinary Victorians are treated with contempt. We will oppose this amendment because it is wrong to trample all over property rights and treat farmers and landowners and producers of food with such contempt. It is a disgrace.

 John LISTER (Werribee) (16:44): I rise to briefly contribute on this amendment and just to remind the Don Quixotes over there who like to tilt at windmills just how much their policies have put back our state in the past. When they banned those developments of wind farms, we got put back years. Now we are making up for it. And when they brought in the planning changes, it put us back years – Don Quixote over here tilting at windmills. We are here making sure that just like every other –

Members interjecting.

John LISTER: They are a bit sensitive over there. They have been called out on contradicting their own party members, and now they are a bit sensitive at being called Don Quixote for tilting at windmills, banning wind farm projects for so long that we have been put behind. This legislation and this amendment are important to make sure that the environment effects statement process and compulsory acquisition are done concurrently, to make sure that we can get these projects online sooner and give that certainty to the regional communities the member for Lowan represents. I know a lot of those communities. I used to live there and teach there. I know these projects very well. They are coming online. We need the transmission pathways to get it to where the users are, which is in the city and around our regional areas. It is important to have this process done concurrently, so we can make sure these projects come online quicker.

I think those opposite need to have a chat within whatever they have – they do not have caucus, whatever they call it; it is not much anyway – to talk to each other and get their story straight. If they care about regional communities, maybe talk to each other and do not contradict each other. I commend these amendments to the house.

 Jade BENHAM (Mildura) (16:46): Acting Speaker, I know there is trepidation in your voice because my reputation precedes me, as it should on this topic, because, yes, regional Victorians in my community are absolutely outraged. But I am going to stay calm. I know that is against my personality. First of all, I want to address a couple of things. To sit here and be lectured on compulsory acquisition for transmission lines for renewable projects in regional Victoria by the members for Albert Park, Werribee and Mordialloc is absolutely offensive in this place. It is as offensive as these amendments ‍– absolutely ridiculous.

Second of all, I would like to address the comments that other members have made about the member for Lowan’s comments that were made in September about the National Electricity (Victoria) Amendment (VicGrid Stage 2 Reform) Bill 2025, that these amendments should have come through then, but because it has been so hard to get through, this is the ‘break the glass in case of emergency’ legislation that they need to trample over regional Victoria. The preceding paragraph for the member for Lowan’s comments was that:

I asked the government – and this might be something that is unexpected from me – to please, for the mental health of our community, provide more mental health supports.

That is why they would not give it context and have taken the member for Lowan out of context, because of the uncertainty around what is happening with these projects in my region and in the member for Lowan’s region. I even had messages today from friends down in Daylesford who are outraged. These are probably traditional Greens voters. They are ready to sign up with the Nats because they are so angry at the lack of consultation and the mental health damage. The suicide rate in regional Victoria is at an all-time high already with everything farmers have to contend with. I mean, honestly, who would be a farmer? The stress and the uncertainty. We always thought it would be drought. Farmers for Climate Action have been saying for years climate change could be the biggest threat to farming – the prices for fertilisers and the prices for any of the overheads. We know and farmers know that the biggest threat to farming in this country is the Labor government. It is the single biggest threat to farming right now and to farmers’ mental health. That is why the member for Lowan made those comments, because she is incredibly concerned about the people out there. It is not about retaining power and trampling over regional Victorians with a care for nothing else. I do get a bit fired up.

The minister when she presented this amendment thanked the Greens, Animal Justice and Legalise Cannabis, and mark my words, regional Victorians will remember that. They will remember all of this and what deals have been done with those parties. What have they sold regional Victorians out for? We will never know. This is the biggest issue to get this over the line. I heard a staffer say before, ‘It’s not that bad. It’s not that bad.’ Meanwhile his mate said, ‘I live in Fitzroy, and we’re NIMBYs.’ To stand in here and be lectured by metropolitan MPs is offensive. Meanwhile this government continues to trample over regional Victoria and disguise it as energy reform, meanwhile being incredible hypocrites and compulsorily acquiring land before the environment effects statement has been done – and the Greens agree with this? What on earth is going on? It could be the full moon. I am not sure. This is absolutely outrageous. It is more than the vibe of the thing with this level of compulsory acquisition. This is utter contempt for regional Victorians, for food and fibre producers.

If we are talking about being more efficient and being able to transmit renewable energy, a solution has been presented. There is plan B: use existing easements. Put projects closer to where the power is needed and use the easements there. They already exist. It will cut costs. It is actually much more cost-efficient. The curtailments are far less. Why on earth wouldn’t you do that rather than build an entire new network whilst trampling over food and fibre producers in this state and just adding another thing on their stress register? Because honestly, the amount of stress that food producers already have – no rain, too much rain, now the price of urea and fertiliser because of the shipping lanes that are restricted, the price of freight because of rail freight – all of this stuff – and now you have neighbours pitted against neighbours for these renewable energy projects that this government claims is for climate change. No, it is not. It is for power. I cannot even work out the logic behind this. I really cannot when there are so many other options. Now that we have community groups actively and very vocally speaking up against it, this is the last straw. They have already taken away the VCAT right of appeal. The member for Mordialloc mentioned before that there has been compulsory acquisition in his community and the integrity was there. Well, this has been piece by piece. The integrity measures in regional Victoria with these projects have been whittled away piece by piece, amendment by amendment, and here we are now.

The Labor government is just giving the finger to regional Victorians and generational farmers who have cared for that land for generations. They make a living off it. They have raised family after family after family. There are family homes that were the ones that the original settlers, oftentimes returned soldiers from World War I, built. One of those is in the pathway of VNI West. Guess what, they can now compulsorily acquire it before any assessment has been done. That is absolutely shameful. Those on the other side sit there and lecture us whilst displaying absolute contempt not only for regional Victorians but for food producers that work their butts off every single day – the amount of farmers you will find that have not had a holiday, not only because they cannot afford it but because they do not have time. Who has got time? The absolute contempt that this government shows for this state’s food producers is disgusting. We are sick of it, which is why the member for Lowan called for mental health support in regional Victoria, because there are people taking their own lives because of the uncertainty. They know that the biggest threat to their farming enterprise is the Labor government. That has never happened to them before. The biggest threat to the Victorian farming and agriculture industry is the Labor government. They all know it, which is why no-one is saying a thing now. They know that that is true.

Nina Taylor interjected.

Jade BENHAM: I do not want to be lectured by the member for Albert Park on agriculture. Honestly. Like we said, if you are so insistent on renewable energy, go and put some towers in Port Phillip Bay and transmission lines over Albert Park and be happy with it and leave us alone.

 Paul MERCURIO (Hastings) (16:55): I am very happy to stand and speak to this amendment. I am also very happy to stand and support the Minister for Energy and Resources at the table. I think the minister at the table probably understands what it is like being at a Married at First Sight dinner, just sitting here and listening to the opposite side not say a lot but just scream in indignation and anger. It is such a shame that they have wasted their time with such a diatribe, which does not actually improve anything whatsoever.

I want to apologise to those on that side too, because what this bill is about is us working to get energy and renewable energy faster to the whole community around Victoria, and this is a very important point that you seem to have missed. Not a lot has been said on that side that makes sense. I am not going to comment on some of the comments that were made, because I think we do not have to go down that road. We can talk with integrity and we can lead by example. I am very happy that the Victorian Greens, Animal Justice Party and Legalise Cannabis have worked with this side of government. I guess it sucks to be on that side, doesn’t it? Anyway, thank you and I support the amendment.

 Peter WALSH (Murray Plains) (16:57): The member for Hastings just does not get it. The people on this side are sticking up for their community. You guys are doing them over; they are sticking up for them. The member for Hastings just does not get the fact that we are passionate for our communities. Our communities are being done over by this Labor government. Can I say – and I said this in the chamber a while ago – to the people that have been opposing VNI West that we will all go and stand with them if we have the opportunity as people try to invade their farms. They are protecting their farms from people coming in from VicGrid, previously from the Australian Energy Market Operator, to invade their farms to do the environmental assessment. This is another piece of legislation to take away their rights.

Can I say to Ben Duxson and to his whole team: you are winning. Keep up the work. You are winning. You are actually doing a good job. This amendment has come about because you are winning. Keep doing it. Keep the Victorian government officials off your farms. They have no right to be on your farms. Keep up the good work, because this amendment that has been brought in at the last minute because of internal government issues is because Ben Duxson and his team are winning. Every time the people want to come on and do an environmental assessment, there is a phone tree. There is not one farmer standing on their own. It is 50, it is 80, it is 100 farmers turning up in their utes. It is standing room only inside that gate to keep the VicGrid officials out, and I say more power to you. Keep doing that. That is the best thing that you can do for country Victoria.

The member for Mildura said the greatest threat to agriculture in this state is the Labor Party. Yes, I endorse that. But the greatest threat to all of Victoria is the Labor Party. Look at the $15 billion in corruption. Look at all the things that are going wrong. The greatest threat to the economy in Victoria is the Labor Party. The greatest threat to the moral fabric of Victoria is the Labor Party, and I would urge everyone that gets the opportunity at the next election to put the Labor Party last.

Nathan Lambert: On a point of order, Speaker, under standing order 109, relevance to the amendments.

The SPEAKER: The time set down for consideration of items on the government business program has arrived, and I am required to interrupt business. The member will have the call when the house returns to the debate.