Abbott government takes RET offer to Senate cross-benchers

The Abbott government says it will take its latest “final” offer on the renewable energy target to the cross-benchers in the Senate after Labor rejected the offer outright.

Environment minister Greg Hunt told RenewEconomy that the government was talking with the cross benchers, which now huber eight individuals following the defections from the Palmer United Party, but said the government would work with both the ALP and the cross bench.

“We have found in one day more commitment from the cross bench than we got in one year from the ALP,” Hunt said. “It is extraordinary we have not put a firm number on the table.”

cross bench

The Abbott government earlier this week increased of the large scale renewable energy target to 32,000GWh, from its previous offer of 31,000GWh. This is down from 41,000GWh currently legislated, but Hunt argues that it is double the current completed installation of 16,000GWh, where some within his party wanted it left.

Hunt and Industry minister Ian Macfarlane argue that the addition of an expected 13,400GWh of rooftop solar will take the combine target back to the original legislated target of 45,000GWh, or around 23 per cent of anticipated demand in 2020.

(The target was amended to reflect a splitting of the scheme. The large scale component was capped at 41,000GWh, and the small scale target left uncapped).

“There is increasing evidence that the cross bench will ensure that we can reach and approve a 23% renewable energy target,” Hunt said. This, he added, would leave the small scale solar scheme untouched, and allow for a “near doubling” of existing large scale installed capacity.

It is to entirely clear whether the Coalition can get the six votes needed, given that the newly independent Glenn Lazarus, the motorist party’s Ricky Muir and the remaining PUP, Dio Wang, have said they want the RET to stay as it is.

David Leyonhjelm last year proposed his own bill to wind back the RET, a move that got support from Bob Day, and would likely be approved by John Madigan and Nick Xenophon, who likes renewables but not wind energy. Jacquie Lambie’s position is not exactly clear.

Hunt said that Gary Gray, one of the three-member team on the ALP, and a former energy minister who once described himself as of “similar views” to Macfarlane and former energy minister Martin Ferguson, was the only ALP official keen to strike a deal.

“Our preference is always to do it with the ALP – but other than Gary Gray, no one else is being constructive.”

Labor environment spokesman Mark Butler rejected the latest offer by Twitter, saying the government would have to aim much further north. However, the clean energy industry was more equivocal.

“The clean energy sector is encouraged by the commitment from both major parties to seek a resolution to the political deadlock on the Renewable Energy Target,” said Kane Thornton, the CEO of the Clean Energy Council, in an emailed statement.

“We continue to hold private conversations with both major parties seeking a resolution that will resolve this issue, revive investment and provide a future for the renewable energy sector in Australia.”

This likely reflects the position the clean energy industry finds itself in, either to accept a much reduced offer, arguing that it is the best that the Coalition will produce – even one that many industry participants say will kill the industry – or hold out for more.

Meanwhile, Hunt took issue with RenewEconomy’s story on the Abbott government’s 10 biggest renewable energy whoppers” story earlier this week.

In particular, Hunt was upset that RenewEconomy had not included quotes from Hunt in the pre-election campaign where he made clear that there would be both a review of the RET, and that the Coalition supported a 20 per cent target.

“We support the Renewable Energy Target and we support the 20 per cent.  We will obviously have a mandated review in 2014,” he said in June, 2013 (and on several other occasions).

Earlier in May, 2013, Hunt was asked three times to clarify his position on the RET, and whether that included support for the 41,000GWh target. To which he replied each time, “we are committed to the 20 per cent target, and have proposed no changes.”

As RE wrote at the time, the 20 per cent support undertaking did not clarify whether that meant 41,000GWh, or the abbreviated 26,000GWh (or real 20 per cent), that the Coalition finally produced. That is what added to the investment uncertainty.

 

Comments

12 responses to “Abbott government takes RET offer to Senate cross-benchers”

  1. Keith Avatar
    Keith

    Nice to see the LNP being consistent ie they continue to distort the truth.

    Do they really think voters are stupid. What does “we …. have proposed no changes” mean Greg Hunt??? … that you planned to halve the RET? Chickens coming home to roost.

  2. JohnOz Avatar
    JohnOz

    Give that we have 16,000GWh renewable energy already, capital costs are falling and there are 5 years to go before 2020 I suspect that arguing about the RET could be akin to arguing about the number of angels that can stand on a pinhead.

    If the mighty dollar rather than fossil fuel subsidies rules the roost Australia should make the 45,000GWh target irrespective of politicking.

  3. Chris Fraser Avatar
    Chris Fraser

    The LNP can’t move forward with their ideology. Their attitude to the RET is cap it, bury it, hope it will go away and be heard no more.Each year that fossil energy becomes more expensive, and fossil assets become more expensive to run – each year that renewable investment gets more bang for the buck – provides us with an ideal RET figure, with a nearly constant cost for each MWh of clean energy. That year-on-year RET figure (ie the annual proportion of clean energy from the total up-and-down energy demand) always increases.RET increases can be planned, they can be set by legislation, and provide a firm affordable program for investment … even before you discuss ecological benefit.

  4. Peter Campbell Avatar
    Peter Campbell

    I have read:
    “In the leadup to the last federal election, when addressing over 500 people at the renewable energy industry’s annual Clean Energy Week convention in Brisbane, Senator Simon Birmingham said, ‘It has been interesting to note the claims being made about what the Coalition will or won’t do though. All of it is simply conjecture. Can I make clear, the Coalition supports the current [RET] system, including the 41,000 GWh target. We know and appreciate that the industry wants certainty.’
    Ministers Macfarlane and Hunt subsequently confirmed that Senator Birmingham had authority to say this at the time, including confirming authority for the specific reference to support for the 41,000 GWh target.”

    So, lie or broken promise?

    1. Alastair Leith Avatar
      Alastair Leith

      Howard made the template: say anything to get power, then all bets are off because… [Budget Emergency or some other BS].

  5. john Avatar
    john

    The key is that 41000 GWH was seen as the projected amount.
    The agreement was for 41000 GWH not some percentage.
    This was expected to be 20%, however percentage was not the reason for the target.
    Now trying to say that we should use 20% of a smaller overall dispatch as being somehow the target is not exactly playing fair and square.
    The protracted situation has had the desired effect of causing stagnation.
    This is to be deplored.

    1. Henry WA Avatar
      Henry WA

      When the fixed amount of 41000 GWH was agreed, it was expected to be at least 20%. A 20% target was regarded as a minimum.

  6. Matthew Dawes Avatar
    Matthew Dawes

    I hope the renewable energy lobbyist are on the case. If Senator Lambie is the key it should be easy to show the benefits of a high target for Tasmania.
    Comparing anti-wind campaigners to anti-vaxers maybe a tactic too.

    1. Alastair Leith Avatar
      Alastair Leith

      And yet Lambie has not publicly acknowledge that simple truth to date that I’m aware of.

  7. GlennM Avatar
    GlennM

    Hi Giles,
    Congratulations..

    As Gandhi said

    “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

    Hunt is now fighting Reneweconomy and complaining..you are close to winning.

    Keep up the good work..

  8. Rob G Avatar
    Rob G

    Ha! Hunt takes issue!? well we take issue with him. Readers of RE know exactly where his interests lie and they are not with renewables or environmental protection. He has gone to enbarssing lengths to prop coal up take the quick $$. Happy to turn his back on climate change. He knows full well that the rest of world is marching onwards in renewables and leaving Australia looking like a backwater, but he is a spineless puppet that follows Australia’s worst PM like gospel. Mark my words Hunt, you and your party’s days are numbered. We the people will no longer suffer you environmental ignorance.
    One last thing, 20% was never the agreed amount for the RET, do you think you can fool us?

  9. Gregory Gange Avatar
    Gregory Gange

    What a fascinating article. I always thought that (LNP in particular) politicians were lying rat bastards. How stupid do they really think we are ? And how do we prove to tones and his buddys that we are not, and that WE DO care about our planet, even if he wants to make that illegal.
    As far as I am concerned he still has to prove his eligibility to stand for parliament before he can tell me what to think.
    Keep up the good work.

Get up to 3 quotes from pre-vetted solar (and battery) installers.