Tuesday, 22 September 2026

 David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (14:20): (1485) My question is for the minister for energy. Minister, I refer to your statements at the CEDA conference, where you were a keynote speaker, on Tuesday last week. You said to the attendees that you will ‘stay the course’ and that:

Equivocating scares the market. Sends projects onto the scrap heap. Certainty is something that is incumbent on governments to be very consistent about.

And on 14 September you told the AFR that pausing transmission projects would see astronomically higher bills. I therefore ask: will the Premier’s decision to order a review of the Western Renewables Link cause the heinous or shocking outcomes that you have predicted?

Members interjecting.

 Jaclyn SYMES (Northern Victoria – Minister for Energy and Resources, Minister for Environment, Minister for Climate Action, Minister for the State Electricity Commission) (14:20): I appreciate the question, Mr Davis, but given your time in this place – you are asking me for an opinion, so technically it could be ruled an inappropriate question. However, what you have asked me about – I think you were in attendance at the same conference I was – I stand by my comments. And what I want to reiterate is that the way you have phrased your question is factually incorrect. There is no review of the project. There is no pause and review, which is the policy position of your party. What has been committed is a cost assessment, Mr Davis, in relation to transparency in relation to the cost of this project, impact on bills et cetera. The project is commencing. It will continue to commence whilst this assessment of costs is underway. This is not a pause and review of the project.

Last week I had the opportunity to talk about the Nexa Advisory report, which is all about what happens if you delay the project, basically putting the energy security of our state at risk. I am very happy to, again, seek to table the report, because what it does show is that the cost of not proceeding with this project, the cost of delaying this project, the cost of pausing this project, which others are on the record of doing, will cost Victorians more on their bills, risk energy reliability. Would you like me to table it, Mr Davis?

 David DAVIS (Southern Metropolitan) (14:23): Well, that was pathetic. The minister tries to argue that a cost assessment will have no impact on the project. I ask: Minister, what if the cost assessment argues that the costs are high? Will the project proceed to add to the bills of Victorians, even at the range of $4 billion?

 Jaclyn SYMES (Northern Victoria – Minister for Energy and Resources, Minister for Environment, Minister for Climate Action, Minister for the State Electricity Commission) (14:23): Mr Davis, thank you for your question. What we know is that the cost to not build this transmission line is something that we cannot afford. This is about –

David Davis: On a point of order, President, the minister was asked about a cost assessment and a particular outcome. She was not asked a question about if that outcome does not occur. She cannot answer a question of her own choosing; she has to answer the question that is asked.

The PRESIDENT: I believe in her answer she was answering the question.

Jaclyn SYMES: What we know is that the cost of not proceeding with this project is something that is unaffordable. In relation to the cost assessment, this is about transparency.