Wednesday, 11 September 2024

Motions

Electricity infrastructure

Debate resumed on motion of David Davis:

That this house:

(1) notes:

(a) the Victoria to New South Wales Interconnector West (VNI West) and West Link transmission lines are proposed to be built in Northern and Western Victoria by Transmission Company Victoria (TCV) and VicGrid;

(b) the significant community opposition to these high voltage powerlines;

(c) the powerlines propose to cross valuable agricultural land which plays a significant role in Victoria’s agricultural production and agricultural exports;

(d) the Paris agreement, a legally binding international treaty adopted by 196 parties at the UN Climate Change Conference (COP21) in Paris, France, on 12 December 2015, states at article 2 that the agreement aims to strengthen the global response to the threat of climate change by ‘Increasing the ability to adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change and foster climate resilience and low greenhouse gas emissions development, in a manner that does not threaten food production’;

(2) is of the view that:

(a) the consultation process by TCV and VicGrid has been inadequate;

(b) the impact of the proposed transmission lines on remnant vegetation at certain sensitive locations must be fully and transparently assessed; and

(3) supports detailed independent examination and economic assessment of the impact of the proposed transmission lines on agricultural production, including on individual properties, prior to the granting of any permits or the signing of deals with landholders.

David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (10:30): I have spoken briefly on this already, and I only propose to add one or two points to my contribution at this time and then allow others to make a contribution. This is a very straightforward motion. It deals with the facts about the interconnector to the VNI West and the western transmission lines. It points to the significant community opposition. It notes the impact of these lines on significant agricultural production. It points to the Paris agreement and notes its understanding that the attempts to reach net zero and lower levels of carbon dioxide emissions should not be at the expense of food production. It then makes the very clear point that the consultation process by Transmission Company Victoria and VicGrid has been inadequate. It then points to the impact of the transmission lines on remnant vegetation, and then it supports detailed independent examination and economic assessment of the impact of the proposed transmission lines on agricultural production. And in this sense it tries to draw to the fore a number of the key issues that are faced in country Victoria now.

It is one thing to support low-emission generation, and we certainly do. We see a significant role for low-emission generation. But at the same time, that must be implemented in a way that does not damage country Victoria. The consultation process under this government has been appalling. People know that. The demonstrations against the Premier in Bendigo recently made that very clear. The presence of people worried about these powerlines at the summit by the Herald Sun and News Corp in Bendigo a few days after that also underlined the point. We have seen repeatedly the state government destroy what is there in terms of any credibility with the approach that they have adopted.

I will just put one case on the record here. Catriona Rowntree spoke out after the government decided they were going to put a battery site near the You Yangs, but that local community discovered that through the media. And I say if you are going to have powerlines or major low-emission technology or storage technology in your local vicinity, you are entitled to be consulted on that. You are entitled to know. You are entitled to put in an objection. You are entitled to have your say. So this is very basic stuff, and the state government has increasingly had an authoritarian turn, a turn that is basically driven by ‘We’re going to do this, we’re going this way and we’re going to overrule you no matter what you want, no matter what you say, no matter what arguments you put up.’ And I think that is increasingly becoming seen by Victorians, especially country Victorians, as completely and utterly unacceptable.

This motion makes those points, it notes the failure of consultation, and I think it is worthy of support because it does send a signal to government and government can actually listen to this. The Minister for Energy and Resources, the Minister for Planning – the two who are driving a lot of this – and the Premier ought to listen to the community. They ought to listen to the sorts of points that we are making here, and they should go back to basics. If they want to put transmission lines in, they need to do it through a proper process. We had the debate in this chamber about VC261, a planning scheme amendment overriding local communities. It is not right. Communities should have a say. There should be a proper process. Local democracy demands that councils and communities and local groups be able to have some say. This motion draws attention to those points.

Michael GALEA (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (10:34): I am happy to be speaking on this motion –

Bev McArthur: You won’t be at the end of it.

Michael GALEA: which has been put forward by the Honourable Mr Davis, and I hope that I will at least speak engagingly enough to keep Mrs McArthur entertained and engaged as well.

Bev McArthur interjected.

Michael GALEA: She has had a coffee. We should be in for a good run. I do want to share a few words on this motion, but in doing so I will note that, as a participating member of the Economy and Infrastructure Committee, it is my understanding that that particular committee has already agreed to a self-referral motion to discuss topics that are either similarly or indeed wholly overlapping with what we are discussing here today. As a member who participates in that committee, I will wait to see the evidence that comes through that committee process. I will not use my time to unnecessarily predetermine the evidence that we are going to receive. I am not quite sure why the Liberal Party, having had this committee inquiry come into effect, are now doing this motion as well, but perhaps they are not quite talking to each other. I do not know. I am sure that their fearless leader Louise Staley will be able to shed some light on what is going on. Their leader seems to have been otherwise engaged with a few things. I know many colleagues over there are desperately scrambling to find out whether they are going to be called into the witness box next week, so we will see what happens over there.

Tom McIntosh interjected.

Michael GALEA: Electrifying performances I am sure, Mr McIntosh. It is very important, though, when we are discussing these projects, that what we are talking about is the nation-leading transition for Victoria to renewable energy. This is a critical thing for us to be doing. It is a critical thing for us to be doing, obviously for the planet, to be shifting to renewable energy, but it is also critical as our peers in other countries around the world – in North America, in Europe and in Asia – are investing in renewable energy as well. A refusal by Victoria or Australia to engage with those renewable technologies would be derelict from an economic point of view as well. It would be holding us back from being able to have those investments in the newer, greener renewable energy projects that are proven, that are viable, that are already taking place and that are continuing to receive investments. I know many such projects are in Mr McIntosh’s region of Eastern Victoria. Right across this state we are seeing a huge increase in the rates of renewable electricity generation. We are seeing that take over those older, conventional coal-fired power stations progressively. It is important that we do so in a measured way that enables that transition to happen, both for the energy grid but also for the jobs, because to get this right means that we will get right the jobs that will stand many Victorians, especially regional Victorians, in good stead for generations to come in the renewable energy sector. That is exactly why projects such as the transmission line projects that we are discussing are so important. We cannot afford to waste time in delaying these projects any more than is reasonably necessary.

David Davis interjected.

Michael GALEA: I will take up your interjection, Mr Davis. I would completely refute the fact that the community has not been spoken to or indeed consulted with. What I will say is that there is always scope for governments to do more and there is always scope for governments to do better. I know that they do not want to hear this, because they do not seem prepared or willing to bring anything constructive into this chamber, but I will give some credit to a crossbench member, Mrs Tyrrell, who actually brought a motion into this place, which received widespread support, for an inquiry for the Environmental and Planning Committee to look at broadscale consultation practices by government and non-government agencies as well, such as power distributors and other grids.

Bev McArthur: It’s a shame she had to bring it to the Parliament.

Michael GALEA: I actually welcome that, Mrs McArthur, because unlike a motion which allows people from across the chamber to speak in verbose terms about something that has already been referred to a committee – which is actually going to achieve, quite frankly, nothing today – what we have seen from a crossbench member is actually a referral motion for an inquiry which is actually going to be effective because it is going to give government some support and give some frank advice back to government on how we can do community consultation better. I do think the point is worth making that whilst we may disagree on various aspects of this matter and of many other matters as well, this is a government that recognises that we are not the fount of all wisdom and we need to be engaging with people, and when there are ways to do that better we genuinely want to do that. That is exactly why we have supported that inquiry referral. I am not on that particular committee, but I do look forward to seeing the work that they produce. I am sure it will provide an informative and educational report for all members of the chamber, but especially for the government. That is indeed the process and one of the many benefits of the committee system that we have.

While some members will use that to drive changes that will benefit everyday Victorians, we see from the Liberals here again yet another motion that is without consequence – in fact without action. It is an excuse, it seems, for the Liberals to ventilate their feelings and distract from what they otherwise might be preoccupied with: getting their statements together and preparing for their cross-examinations next week when they are facing the defamation trial of their leader. It is an extraordinary set of circumstances to find themselves in – again, not caring about everyday Victorians but looking only at themselves. One can only wonder what sensible people think and what the Nationals and indeed, Mrs Broad, what you must think of the circus that goes on in your coalition partner. I do feel for you whilst they continue to be preoccupied with fighting themselves and trying to get the numbers over their leader or for their leader. They are very ambitious for their leaders over there, suffice to say.

Tom McIntosh interjected.

Michael GALEA: A third run for Matty Guy – God help us all, Mr McIntosh, if that were to happen. I am sure some of those colleagues on the opposite side might agree with you. They might be quite horrified by that thought too. Indeed many seem horrified by the current situation as well. I am sure the decent members over on that side are absolutely scratching their heads at what sort of outfit they have got themselves into. We know that Dr Bach saw fit to find his best career prospects on the other side of the world in a school – and a very noble profession it is, teaching – but the fact that he saw going back to his roots of teaching as a better career prospect than remaining as deputy leader of this outfit is perhaps no small wonder.

David Davis: On a point of order, Acting President, this is a motion about powerlines and points about vegetation and landholders. It has got nothing to do with a former member of this place who is now teaching in the UK – nothing at all. It is out of order.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Jacinta Ermacora): Please stick to the motion.

Michael GALEA: I will return to what is actually important, and that is not facile motions by the opposition that do not even attempt to achieve anything. What is really important is a government that actually listens to Victorians, that delivers for Victorians and that delivers that renewable energy future. I again remind the house that just earlier this year we saw a reduction in wholesale and retail electricity prices through the Victorian default offer, which all Victorians can avail themselves of and which was already lower than the national default offer. Victoria is the only state to go on its own to have that lower default offer, and it has actually gone down even lower again. We do have, through that, the cheapest energy prices in the nation.

I do want to note as well that whilst we are talking about electricity transmission and distribution, we have seen once again some devastating storms across Victoria in the last couple of weeks, although mercifully nowhere near as bad as what we saw in February. I want to acknowledge once again the very hardworking line workers of AusNet in particular but of other distributors as well, who have worked tirelessly to connect people across eastern Victoria but also pockets of my region of South-Eastern Metropolitan back to power. We did see more encouraging signs with mobile phone connectivity as well. We did not see the outages that we saw in February, and I reiterate my enthusiastic support for my colleague the member for Monbulk’s campaign to tell the telcos to power the towers. I acknowledge her advocacy on that front. Reliable electricity generation and transmission is a really, really important thing to get right for all Victorians, and this is a government that is certainly delivering that, just as we are delivering a renewable energy future and cheaper power prices for Victorians.

Bev McARTHUR (Western Victoria) (10:45): It is no surprise that those on the other side do not want to talk about transmission lines. It is the bane of their life. They should have had a transmission line built by now, but because of the concern of the communities that they have ridden roughshod over, there is no way they can get a spade in the ground. For Mr Galea to talk about ‘listening and consultation’ – they obviously cannot spell the words, because there is no listening or consultation –

David Davis: He’s in cloud-cuckoo-land.

Bev McARTHUR: Absolutely. There has been no listening or consultation taking place across the Western Renewables Link – or the interconnector line now – going up to New South Wales at all. The local members of Parliament, let alone the minister, have been AWOL. They are never around. I have seen the vacant chairs with their names on them at public meeting after public meeting for the last five years – nowhere to be seen in the electorates of Ripon or Eureka or anywhere, nowhere to be seen. For Mr Galea to think it is not a good idea to talk about transmission lines, he is delusional. It is the most important issue facing people in country Victoria. Yes, all your friends inside the tram tracks want guilt-free green energy, but you are prepared to do it with brown, out-of-date technology crisscrossing the pristine countryside like a spider web. You are a disgrace for not embracing the idea that we should do transmission –

John Berger interjected.

Bev McARTHUR: for the next hundred years, Mr Berger, not the next election. We ought to do it the best possible way so that we have a format that delivers energy transmission that is world leading, not 40-year-old technology. Get with the modern era, Mr Berger. You are out of date.

One of the very important points in this motion is about the impact of the proposed transmission lines on remnant vegetation. I just want to go to some remnant vegetation. I do not know where the Greens are today; they are AWOL as well. They ought to be totally on this bandwagon, because vegetation is supposed to be their bread and butter, but they are nowhere to be seen. I did raise this issue in the adjournment debate last night. I know not enough people were listening, so I thought I would give it to you again.

I was talking about a green power hub in the Navarre area. It is hard to believe this stuff. This hub covers 18,000 hectares, Mr Galea. I do not know whether you were here last night to listen to my wisdom. But anyway, the second location, directly adjacent to the Kara Kara National Park, Mount Bolangum flora and fauna reserve and the Morrl Morrl Nature Conservation Reserve, is in close proximity to Stuart Mill and Big Tottington nature reserves and Little Tottington state forest. All of these are internationally – not just locally – recognised key biodiversity areas between which species, particularly birds, travel. Believe it or not, they travel – birds. There is the impact from approximately 100 turbines – this is one of your very important renewable energy proposals – around 280 metres tall, from kilometres overhead, 220-kilovolt transmission lines, a battery energy storage system, two substations and significant construction damage, including onsite quarries.

The following rare and endangered birds face turbine strike and devastating habitat loss. This is going to be exactly the same issue for transmission lines – totally the same issue. The Greens need to know that the swift parrot, the barking owl, the bush stone-curlew and the black falcon are all critically endangered according to the federal Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 and Victoria’s flora and fauna guarantee listings. The speckled warbler and the hooded robin are considered endangered, and the powerful owl, the brown treecreeper, the diamond firetail and the painted honeyeater are also vulnerable. These migratory birds are threatened, as are other animals – endangered tree goannas, vulnerable pink-tailed worm-lizards, golden sun moths, eastern bent-wing bats and squirrel gliders. Vast swathes of their habitats face destruction. Populations face extinction. Are you worried about that? Are you worried about the extinction of whole –

David Davis interjected.

Bev McARTHUR: They will steamroll over everything, including endangered species. This is unbelievable. You lot do not care about the environment. We have been there.

John Berger interjected.

Bev McARTHUR: You need to get outside the tram tracks, Mr Berger. I know you live in my electorate and outside of yours, but anyway. Plant life too faces social destruction, including endangered orchids, no less. Endangered orchids are going to be threatened by this.

David Davis interjected.

Bev McARTHUR: Native orchids – well, they are endangered, Mr Davis. They are totally endangered. They are going to be wiped out. The whole thing is they are going to be wiped out. There are going to be no more. 135 hectares of them are going to be wiped out, but it also includes 23 hectares of grey box grass and native south-east Australian grasslands, 5 hectares of white box –

Tom McIntosh interjected.

Bev McARTHUR: Are you concerned about this, Mr McIntosh, or not? It includes white box, yellow box and Blakely’s red gum grassy woodland. And this is what the proponents are saying; this is not even what the local concerned citizens are saying. This is the proponents saying they are going to wipe out all these species of flora and fauna. So thank goodness I succeeded in getting a self-referenced inquiry up through the Economy and Infrastructure Committee. You are on the committee, Mr McIntosh, so you will look forward to hearing the evidence.

A member interjected.

Bev McARTHUR: We are definitely going to travel. Oh, here are the Greens. Come along. Did you hear that, Aiv? All those endangered species are being threatened by the Labor Party approach to renewable energy, wiping out whole bodies of flora and fauna, Mr Puglielli. You need to get on the bandwagon on this.

The committee is great. I have been trying to get one of these inquiries up. You have thwarted it all of the time – a number of people have. Thank goodness for some crossbenchers – Moira Deeming and the chair Ms Purcell – who supported the motion. This inquiry will be excellent, and it is what the people in the community have been looking for. This is what they have been asking for for years – a robust inquiry that will work out –

The PRESIDENT: Mrs McArthur, I just gently remind you not to discuss internal committee discussions in the chamber.

Bev McARTHUR: No, I will just give the details of the inquiry, which will inquire into – and it is on the public record now – the expansion of Victoria’s high-voltage power transmission system as proposed by AEMO, VicGrid and the Transmission Company Victoria, TCV, and the expansion of Victorian transmission connections associated with the Victorian government’s proposed renewable energy zones. It will look into the suitability of existing plans for development, the predicted impact on the uptake of Victorian low-emission energy generation and the long-term necessity or otherwise of interconnectors and augmented high-voltage transmission networks. It will investigate the best practice in construction. Let us do it the best possible way. We will use experts from around Australia and internationally to find out how you do transmission the best way. What is not to love about that, Mr Berger? You would have to like energy transmission being done the best possible way, wouldn’t you? Isn’t that what you would want? You do not want some dodgy bit of transmission. Believe it or not, they blow over as well, these transmission towers. They have blown over in my electorate. A bit of a high wind and they are on the ground. They can start fires, but you cannot fight fires underneath them.

Tom McIntosh: Tell us what you would do, Bev.

Bev McARTHUR: We would have transmission done the very best possible way. And of course you have to investigate how you do it underground as well, Mr McIntosh. Let us look at the best possible way, not the cheapest and nastiest way, Mr McIntosh. You want to impose on your constituencies out there in Eastern Victoria the most dreadful form of transmission possible. You would surely want the best form of transmission that is likely.

Sheena WATT (Northern Metropolitan) (10:55): It is probably no surprise that I rise to oppose this motion from those opposite. I am disappointed but not even a little bit surprised that a motion like this would be brought forward by members who have filibustered and tried to derail progress at every step of the way towards Victoria’s renewable energy future. This government, and I have said it time and time again, has some of the most ambitious emissions targets in the nation and indeed the world. Those opposite appear to have limited their ambition to conducting business as usual, or perhaps their ambitions are little bit more nuclear powered, as I understand it, just like their colleagues in Canberra.

Transmission projects form an integral part of Victoria’s energy transmission. We need new transmission lines to bring power from our state’s impressive, growing and thriving network of solar and wind farms and into the homes of consumers. The substance of this motion is that Mr Davis wants to suspend Victoria’s transmission line installation projects, and I find it galling really that such a motion would be brought forward by a member in metropolitan Melbourne whose constituents will only benefit from these projects, like mine.

I am going to go back and cover ground which has already been covered a number of times in this place, because some of the facts appear to have been forgotten, and I am going to start with the state of transmission lines right now. Our coal-fired power stations are reaching the end of their scheduled life cycles, and when they retire we are replacing them with new renewable forms of energy generation. These renewable projects are crucial to keeping the lights on. They are crucial for keeping energy prices low as Victorians face a cost-of-living crisis. We understand this. Many of these renewable energy projects are in places where we have not had power generation before, and we need to move the power generated through transmission lines into towns, into cities, into businesses and into industry. Projects like these new generation sites are installing transmission lines that form part of our critical plan to generate more than 60,000 jobs in our renewable energy transition. These projects will also bring Victoria closer to the goal of producing 95 per cent of our electricity through renewable energy sources by 2035.

Where there are some pre-existing transmission lines, almost none of them are younger than 50 years old. In fact most of the transmission lines in the Latrobe Valley were built in the 1930s, the 40s, the 50s and the 60s. I know that there are new ways of doing things. Much to the disappointment of those opposite, it is no longer the 40s, it is no longer the 50s and it is no longer the 60s, and we cannot keep using the same infrastructure and hoping for better performance on some ageing infrastructure. We need to meet the needs of Victoria’s growing community. I have got to say we are talking about community consultation, and we are absolutely making sure that we do this in the right way.

The Allan Labor government is completely changing the way that renewable energy zones and transmission are planned and developed in our state. We understand that the arm’s-length planning arrangements largely put in place by those opposite after privatisation were really not fit for purpose. Under the arrangements that were in place when we came into government, AEMO, the Australian Energy Market Operator, planned an expansion of our transmission network. Once they identified the need for a new line, they conducted an economic test to assess whether it stacked up financially. They then initiated a procurement process to find a private company to build and operate the line. Only then did full environmental assessments begin, and only then was the community fully engaged in the process. That is AEMO, can I just say. That process is completely backwards, and I am happy to say that. I am absolutely going to say that, and it is creating some great uncertainty in our community that host new energy infrastructure and uncertainty for investors. I am going to tell you that AEMO got it wrong, and what we have done is we have established a new government body, VicGrid.

I recall the actual debate on that legislation here in this house. I have got to say we are implementing a new planning program that actually puts community consultation at the very centre and the very heart of our projects through Engage Victoria and a public engagement framework. I have got to tell you, where communities have in the past felt entirely unheard, we are going back –

Members interjecting.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Michael Galea): Order! I cannot hear Ms Watt. Can we keep the interjections slightly quieter.

Sheena WATT: I want to talk a little while longer about this, but maybe I will change tack and talk about agriculture. As one of those of us that live inside the tram tracks, it is something that I enormously value, respect and honour. I have got to tell you I do not grow much fruit and vegetables in my apartment, but what I do know is that some of the best fruit and vegetables come from Victoria. I am talking about places up in the north-east. I was very happy to hear about the coexistence of renewable energy technologies with Victoria’s agricultural production. In fact the Tatura SmartFarm on their site have solar panels that have been installed over a pear orchard, and yields have not been negatively affected by the installation of renewable energy technology. There is a whole range of farmers getting on board with it across the state. I have just learned that there is a term for it, and that term is ‘agrivoltaic farms’. There you go. It is a new one for Hansard. It is where farmers continue to produce agricultural goods – whether it is livestock or crops – around renewable energy production infrastructure installed on their property.

I was watching Landline the other week, and I have got to tell you –

Members interjecting.

Sheena WATT: Yes, I do watch Landline; it is a brilliant show. I have got to tell you that most of the time I am very happy to talk about Landline because it is one that I very much like. They were talking about the sheep underneath the solar panels. It was great to hear what the farmers were talking about. Do you know what? I know that more and more landholders are considering this, further incentivised by the fact that – they may have not known, but I am happy to say – we are offering financial compensation to the tune of $200 000 over 25 years per kilometre of transmission line that is installed. This compensation will be indexed over time to give recipients the long-term financial certainty that they absolutely deserve.

The simple fact of the matter is – and I will say this to you – you can generate all the energy in the world, but without a transmission line it is not going anywhere. We want the transmission lines that will bring the power to the homes and keep the lights on. That is only happening because of our record investment in cheaper, more reliable renewable energy. Victoria has consistently had the lowest wholesale power prices in the country over the last two years, and that is absolutely coming through to retail prices. I have got to tell you that; it is coming through. We will continue to do research, continue to do the work and continue to do what is needed so the state does not take a single step backwards from its transition to this renewable energy future. We are committed to keeping the lights on for all Victorians.

Can I echo the comments made by the previous government speaker Mr Galea and give my thanks to all of the emergency services workers out there supporting the community when we recently did have the lights go off ever so briefly due to the storms. The truth is that there is a new technology coming this way, and we need to have transmission lines and transmission infrastructure ready for the storms of today. I thank the members of the community right across the state who are getting involved and helping out by volunteering, stepping up and doing all that they can do.

This motion before us is yet another attempt to delay what really needs to be done, and that is to make sure that renewable energy and renewable energy projects come online as soon as possible and that it is done in a way that completely values the community and all the various community members around the place. I know that transmission lines are central to keeping the lights on. This state needs them to be built, and we are going to deliver. On this motion I am calling it out for what it is: it is time wasting by those opposite when we need to get on with the job of supporting working Victorians and this state.

Gaelle BROAD (Northern Victoria) (11:05): I rise to support this motion on behalf of the Nationals. It is a very important motion, and it talks about the VNI West, which is proposed to be built in north-western Victoria by Transmission Company Victoria and VicGrid. The motion talks to the significant community opposition to these high-voltage powerlines – powerlines proposed to cross valuable agricultural land. The motion also talks about the consultation process by TCV and VicGrid, which has been absolutely inadequate. For those who may be tuning in and thinking, ‘What is VNI West?’, the Victoria to New South Wales interconnector west, known as VNI West, is the proposed new 500-kilovolt double-circuit transmission line connecting the high-voltage electricity grids in New South Wales and Victoria. Now, you might be thinking, ‘What’s the fuss about transmission lines?’ Well, these towers are as high as the MCG lights, so that is significant. They are about 70 to 80 metres high, the equivalent to a 24-storey building. The easements are about 75 metres, passing through regional Victoria, including irrigated areas and prime agricultural land. If you are not sure how wide that is, that is about three tennis courts long.

Right now the Labor government are ignoring regional communities, and they have made an absolute mess of this process. They have been removing the rights of communities to appeal, and that has been a major concern to people in the electorate of Northern Victoria that I represent. I have been to the community consultation sessions at Charlton and Wedderburn, and I have spoken in this house previously about how disappointing they were. I asked to go and listen to some discussion that was in a separate room and I was denied that, even though I asked several times. It was certainly a divide-and-conquer type of consultation session. I know Mr Galea in a previous contribution in this debate said that communities had been spoken to. They certainly have been spoken to, but I would say Mr Galea should also acknowledge that the government has a lot of work to do to improve the consultation process. Time and again we hear about consultold rather than consulted.

Transmission Company Victoria was created by the Australian Energy Market Operator to progress the VNI West. The TCV brochure for landowners states:

What if I don’t agree to the easement?

Transgrid is committed to genuine negotiations to reach agreement with you. If we do not reach agreement following the six month period after the initial offer or letter of intent is issued, Transgrid may take steps towards compulsory acquisition under the Just Terms Act – however this is typically as a final resort, and would occur in parallel to any ongoing negotiations with you.

This process has been a hard one, a very difficult one for regional communities. I know my federal Nationals colleague Dr Anne Webster has been out visiting, and I will quote from the Gannawarra Times, who reported on this. She said:

Just this week visiting Charlton, Donald and St Arnaud I met with one justifiably upset lady whose farm is in the VNI-West pathway and she’s been driven to tears by Transmission Company Victoria’s behaviour. Farmers have had to pursue legal advice or become experts in their non-existent spare time on energy, planning, property and other laws and regulations to know their rights.

I had a parliamentary intern, Henry Nind, who went out and spoke with people and interviewed some of these people that are being directly impacted by these proposed transmission lines. His report states:

Some developers completely avoid consulting with local communities altogether, and instead resort to ‘divide and conquer’ tactics to prevent coordinated community action and compel local landowners into selling their land at discounted prices. These tactics most commonly involve developers ambushing local landowners, arriving at their properties without prior notice and discouraging them from obtaining independent legal counsel, all in an attempt to pressure them into signing a deal on disadvantageous terms.

The report goes on to say:

The forcible expropriation of land to create easements also has the potential to reinforce the widespread perception that the Victorian Government does not care about regional communities and their interests.

Transgrid is now working with landowners and undertaking targeted surveys within the preferred route to identify a 200-metre-wide construction corridor, but I will say that the Labor government yet again is doing it backwards. They have already started identifying the route and we have seen AusNet taking padlocks off farm gates without permission, but now they are just developing the Victorian transmission plan. The Victorian Farmers Federation have been calling for a statewide plan for renewables and transmission lines since 2018, and Labor have been in government for a decade. I know Ms Watt referred to VicGrid and Engage Victoria, but I will just quote something that I read in the VicGrid fact sheet from July 2024. It says:

We will produce a Victorian Transmission Plan in 2025, 2027 and then every 4 years. We are getting ready to prepare the first one, the 2025 Victorian Transmission Plan, which will consider Victoria’s energy needs over the next 15 years.

I will say that is a bit late. It goes on to say:

We are committed to implementing a new way of planning energy infrastructure that gives First Peoples, landholders and communities a real voice.

What did they have before? Obviously none. It goes on to say:

We are also inviting feedback on the study area until 30 September 2024. This feedback will be considered during the refinement process to identify draft proposed renewable energy zones, which will be shared for feedback in the draft 2025 Victorian Transmission Plan in early 2025.

…

You’ll find the full draft Victorian Transmission Plan Guidelines, study area and more information about how to provide feedback and other engagement opportunities at engage.vic.gov.au/vicgrid

I do share that with you because I think it is really important that people take the opportunity to make a submission to the Victorian transmission plan, which is open until 30 September. I only hope that the government listen to the feedback, because I was in Bendigo at the recent rally where we had nearly 500 people protesting at the All Seasons resort outside where the Premier was in attendance at a Rural Press Club luncheon and yet she failed to go out and listen to the concerns that were being raised by farmers from right across the region. There are so many legitimate questions that remain unanswered. Now, these are people that live, work and raise a family. They volunteer in regional committees. They put food on our tables and clothes on our backs. In some cases families have been there living in those communities for five generations and now they are finding themselves on the path of a transmission line, and they are scared because no-one in this government is listening.

The minister has overridden the process, removed the rights of appeal to VCAT and removed the rights of local councils and is just rolling out with any concerns, and the Premier’s response to ‘respectfully disagree’ with the concerns raised is very disappointing. The government did produce a report that has been conveniently taken down that said 70 per cent of Victorian farmland could be subject to infrastructure development. I think farmers deserve a right to be heard. They make a significant contribution to the agricultural industry, and there are nearly 70,000 jobs in agriculture in our state, but Labor cannot manage money and they have certainly made an absolute mess of Victoria’s energy supply. We need secure, reliable and affordable energy that has a balance from different energy resources.

I have spoken with businesses who are worried – manufacturing companies in Bendigo that rely on gas and pay huge amounts for electricity. The cost-of-living crisis and the cost of production is causing a crisis for our manufacturing sector, and these costs are being driven up because of the policies of this government. I was also contacted by a gentleman who raised concerns about the process of consultation, and he said it has not been transparent at all. The Liberals and Nationals proposed an inquiry into the high-voltage powerline transmission system, and I am very pleased that there will be a committee inquiry into this, because this does not just matter for regional Victorians; it matters for the whole of our state.

Tom McINTOSH (Eastern Victoria) (11:15): I have read through this motion a number of times trying to get my head around exactly what the Liberals, it seems with the support of the Nationals, are trying to put forward today. Mr Davis is not here. The fact that the Liberals have only put two speakers on this motion shows how much they really care about it and how important it is. The Liberals have given this critically important portfolio to Mr Davis, yet he treats it with such little regard. He put so little detail into the motion, and we are standing here for 90 minutes debating it, wasting all of our time, when there is no tangible outcome to come out of the words that are put on paper. What is the Liberal Party’s plan to power this state? There is no plan. There is opposition, there is negativity, there is fearmongering and that is it. There is nothing viable put on the table by the alternative government in this state. There has been nothing in the contributions we have heard about the critically important task of powering this state and how the opposition would do it.

We talk in this place very frequently about how for 100 years we have had our state powered by the Latrobe Valley, and we have had 6000 kilometres of transmission lines across this state during that time. I grew up on farms near transmission lines, and where were the Liberals in all those decades? Where were the Liberals screaming against transmission lines during that period? You were not. We had to get on and power the state, and that is what we have to keep on doing. For over two decades the Liberals have denied climate change and have delayed action on climate change. It is absolutely important that farmers are consulted on how this transmission is rolled out, where it is rolled out and where compensation is applied. It is the same for communities. That is why we have development funds to ensure that communities are all benefiting. That is why we are ensuring that First Nations communities are benefiting. Probably one of the most disgraceful things I have seen in my 2¼ years in this Parliament was David Davis moving amendments to see that our First Nations communities would not see a dollar out of this.

The important thing about the tens of billions of dollars that are going to flow across this state in the next couple of decades as we repower is the share of that wealth across our communities. When there are new renewable projects there are jobs in local communities that will see workers having families and sending kids to the local schools. It is about seeing money in communities – seeing footy clubs get money and various sports groups and various community groups. That is why these development funds are important – because they identify what is important to the community and where it should be spent. We see great examples of this in towns like Mirboo North where funds are held, managed and distributed by the community for the community. We saw what happened in Mirboo North earlier this year. We have seen the storms across the place. We have seen how they affect particularly regional Victorians and we have seen how they affect farmers, yet we have not heard one word of that today.

Just last week I was at the new energy conference in Gippsland. Hundreds of people assembled, talking about the delivery of new energy. This is, I think, the third conference I have attended. This is work that has been happening over years – setting targets, providing investors with certainty, seeing renewables go up. That is why we have 40 per cent renewable energy generation in this state right now. That is why in 11 years, 95 per cent of this state’s energy will come from renewables, because we have set a plan and we have given a course for industry to follow. But you are not interested in giving industry any certainty. All you have given industry in recent decades is uncertainty, and you are at it again. I do not even want to talk about nuclear, because it is a waste of time, but you have flipped on your head. We could stand here and talk for 20 minutes on nuclear and how absurd it is. I do not know what Menzies would think if he looked at all you right now; you are ideologically absurd. There is no connection with economics. There is no connection with outcomes. It is just: how do we wreck, how do we destroy, how do we whip up fear in communities?

What I do not understand is why you are so hell-bent. There is language in here – I need to find it in my notes – basically wanting to put in further barriers to farmers getting income. I thought you were the party of trusting businesspeople, which farmers are, to get on and get income to their farm – because when droughts hit, when severe weather events hit, you know what is pretty handy to a family farm? Having diversified income. But you are so ideologically opposed to it. I was out at a farm two days ago turning the first sod on a project for 5 megawatts of solar alongside agri. This is absolutely the way of the future, where farmers are diversifying their income and we get energy security. I know you lot would rather see oil get shipped from the other side of the world from some dictatorship, brought past nations that are potentially geopolitically insecure, to be burnt to add to our emissions. No talk about emissions over there.

Bev McArthur interjected.

Tom McINTOSH: Bev, you could have been in the Greens with your contribution. The environmentalist has come out of nowhere. Next you are going to be saying we should get cattle off the ground. Your contribution was environmental extremism, and you know why? It is all because of your ideological opposition to renewables, because you see it as a way, you see it as a political path. That is all you see it as: a political path. And there was no mention about the economic opportunity –

Moira Deeming: On a point of order, Acting President, the member is constantly pointing, and I am terrified.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (Michael Galea): There has been some pointing. I will ask Mr McIntosh to refrain from pointing at the opposition.

Tom McINTOSH: I would like to thank you for the point of order. I will absolutely take that on board. There has been no talk about the fact that power prices have come down in the recent default offer. There is no talk about the fact that renewables are the cheapest form of energy. We are not hearing about that, are we, because there is no plan from those opposite.

David Davis interjected.

Tom McINTOSH: Here we go – Mr Davis is back. I will come back to what I started my debate with: it is breathtaking that a party that presents itself as the opposition government in this state, much like its federal counterpart, has no plan for energy. They have no plan for the economic impacts it has on this state, for our homes, for our businesses, for government. There is no plan; there is just fearmongering and rot, and Victorians see that. They see it is all part of this ideological vent that has driven over 20 years. As I said before –

Bev McArthur: You must hate the community, Mr McIntosh.

Tom McINTOSH: No, Mrs McArthur, I have a deep care and concern for community, which is why I am in this place. I tell you what, it is our entire community that is going to suffer without action on climate change. Every time someone opens up that insurance bill – insurance bills went up 16 per cent last year – every time a farmer gets smashed by a severe weather event there are crocodile tears post these events but no plans and no actions to get in front of what is coming. That is why I stood up here last week for a members statement – to call out you lot. That is what I did and I have not heard a word since, and I am sure that we will not hear a word going forward. All we are going to hear is maniac ideology that does not provide any plan for Victorians.

Sonja TERPSTRA (North-Eastern Metropolitan) (11:25): I also rise to make a contribution on this motion in Mr Davis’s name, and by and large it is in regard to the transmission lines. I have had the benefit of listening to Mr McIntosh’s contribution, and I am looking at all of them lining up there on the opposition benches ready to have a crack. But Mr Davis skulked away. He skulked away out of the chamber, because he did not want to hear. I will do my best to give voice to this contribution.

I think the important thing to say up-front of course is that the government opposes this motion. The last part of the motion actually talks about calling for:

… examination and economic assessment of the impact of the proposed transmission lines on agricultural production, including on individual properties, prior to the granting of any permits …

et cetera. What is lost on those opposite is that the cost of doing nothing is actually far greater than doing something, which is proposed as part of this government’s agenda in transitioning to renewable energy. Mrs McArthur’s interjection earlier was about farmers not being able to get insurance and the like, but the truth of it is that whether you are a farmer or whether you are someone who owns residential property, if we do nothing about climate change, the cost of doing nothing will mean that there will be more frequent serious storm events, like we have seen recently. We have had intense rainfall, as we have seen with the floods in 2022. What we know, and what is predicted with a lot of certainty, is that if we do not act on climate change, we can be absolutely assured that there will be more extreme weather events. Whilst this motion focuses on the proposed transmission lines, the economic assessment and cost, it is misguided, because the facts are that if we do nothing and we do not transition away from fossil fuels, the costs will be a lot greater.

I have spoken to many people in my electorate but also when I have gone out and about on various inquiries that have been undertaken in the past – and I think people on the opposition benches forget that I actually did have a life before I came to this place and I have actually engaged with people from various backgrounds, including farmers – and there are differing views amongst the farming and agricultural community about climate change. Not everyone is on a unity ticket about how it should be handled. The bottom line is that the transmission lines are an integral part of how we are going to get power to people. The point is that just because you are on the opposition benches does not mean that you know what is best for people. What we like to do over here in government is listen to our experts. We listen to experts like engineers, like scientists and like people who actually work in the sector, because Mr Davis, we know what would happen if you lot were ever in government. I mean you could not even put together a motion last sitting week that was coherent, so we can imagine what you lot would do if you were ever in government. It would be a shambles. It would be an utter shambles.

Bev McArthur interjected.

Sonja TERPSTRA: It is going very well in fact. I talked earlier about our economy, how it is growing and all the jobs we are creating. Most Victorians would agree with me when I say this. Many Victorians and certainly our government understand how important the agricultural sector is, particularly our farmers, because Victoria is a really important food bowl. If we continue to have extreme climate and weather events of the like that we have seen in recent years, which put under serious threat Victoria’s capacity to produce food, whether it is crops or beef or cattle or sheep or whatever you want to talk about, climate change is a serious threat to that sector. I know that not everybody is on a unity ticket with those opposite when it comes to talking about the western transmission lines, and people want to be assured that when they turn on the lights there will be power. Victoria’s ageing coal-fired generators are becoming increasingly unreliable and are retiring. By 2035 the remaining 4.8 gigawatts of coal-fired generators will be gone.

The point is, if we actually do nothing, then the lights will be out, and we cannot afford to do that. We are working to ensure our renewable energy projects, and I am really excited every time I hear about the progress that is being made on including wind in the renewable energy mix, the progress of wind farms that are going ahead and all the other projects that are coming on line. We know that when these coal-fired generators do shut down the mix of renewables is there to support the fact that, when you turn the switch on, the lights on, you will have power, and that is really important. At the same time we are working on reducing carbon emissions and making sure that we meet our renewable energy targets but also on reducing the impacts of climate change. Farmers and other industries are susceptible to extreme weather events, and we want to build resilience into those sectors because they are important contributors to the economy.

Again, this motion, as I said, is misguided. It says we are not consulting and we are not doing this or that. These are the same lines from central casting that get trotted out again and again: we are not consulting, we are not doing this and not doing that. But again, I can say that, in regard to this issue, many Victorians are not on unity ticket with those opposite when it comes to this matter. What Victorians want is reliable energy and power, and we have a plan to keep the lights on and to keep prices low. When I talked about the GenCost report the other day, I think the estimates were that if we did include nuclear into the power mix, we would have energy bills that would increase by over $1000 per kilowatt hour. Those opposite, goodness me if they were ever in government. I do not know how I would pay my power bills, and it is a scary proposition to think, if they were ever in government, what would be involved in the energy mix. I think we would have more brownouts and blackouts than we have ever seen in Victoria’s history. Again, it is a misguided motion. This motion is another time-wasting episode and an attempt by the coalition to block the renewables rollout.

John Berger interjected.

Sonja TERPSTRA: This is it, Mr Berger: only two speakers. Again, it is about the coalition just wanting to block our attempts at renewables. They want to block our attempts at managing climate change. They are just time-wasters. This project is being thoroughly assessed by the Australian Energy Market Operator through a six-year planning process to date, followed by a two-year environment effects statement process. Honestly, we are consulting. That is what an EES process is designed to do – to talk to people who may be impacted by these things and get their feedback on it. Independent consultants have also done a thorough assessment of plan B and found it wanting, and if we took any advice from those opposite nothing would ever get built. As I said, the lights would go out and Victorian power prices would absolutely go up. Again, it just is negative. I know they try to come up with something, some kind of alternative, but again, it is half-baked or underdone, not cooked and not thought through. I think that the primary objective of those opposite is to simply say: ‘No. Anything the government does – bad. Bad government bad, and we oppose.’ But what Victorians want is leadership from the government, which they elected with an increased majority I might add. We were elected to govern, and we do that every day because we are working on reducing the impacts of climate change and we are working on rolling out our renewable energy projects, and the western transmission line is an important part of that. I conclude my contribution there, and as I said, we will be opposing this motion.

David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (11:35): This is a very reasonable and moderate motion, a motion that draws attention to the government’s failures to consult properly and a motion that actually calls for a better way forward. The government ought to consult properly in the community, the government ought to undertake proper steps to understand the best way forward and the government ought not to do the damage that it is doing in country Victoria now. I make the point that it is quite possible to accept that there needs to be a transition to lower emission technologies and lower emission generation and to point out that there are problems with the government’s approach with its long-distance, high-voltage powerlines and the arrogant approach that it has adopted. We heard from Ms Terpstra that the government was here to help and the government was going to do the right thing. I am far from convinced. Everyone I have talked to in country Victoria says that in fact the government has steamrolled communities arrogantly. It is a long-term government, 10 years old, well out of touch and doing considerable damage to our country communities.

Council divided on motion:

Ayes (17): Melina Bath, Jeff Bourman, Gaelle Broad, Georgie Crozier, David Davis, Moira Deeming, Renee Heath, Ann-Marie Hermans, David Limbrick, Wendy Lovell, Trung Luu, Bev McArthur, Joe McCracken, Nick McGowan, Evan Mulholland, Rikkie-Lee Tyrrell, Richard Welch

Noes (22): Ryan Batchelor, John Berger, Lizzie Blandthorn, Katherine Copsey, Enver Erdogan, Jacinta Ermacora, David Ettershank, Michael Galea, Shaun Leane, Sarah Mansfield, Tom McIntosh, Rachel Payne, Aiv Puglielli, Georgie Purcell, Samantha Ratnam, Harriet Shing, Ingrid Stitt, Jaclyn Symes, Lee Tarlamis, Sonja Terpstra, Gayle Tierney, Sheena Watt

Motion negatived.