MATTERS OF URGENCY
Senator McLACHLAN (South Australia) (16:45): I can assure Senator Ghosh that there will be no torrent of contumely! I'll make a very measured contribution to the Senate this afternoon. It's what you would expect from me and it's what you'll receive.
I understand completely the passion of my friend Senator Scarr when he reads the stories of those Australians that are doing it tough with the distribution of fuel. And I encourage the government to do more in managing our supply chains, particularly getting fuel to the regions. At the same time, there was a persuasive contribution to this debate by Senator Pocock—that these matters have been longstanding and that this war has, and will, cause us as a nation to reflect on our energy security.
Perhaps we should also reflect on the pace of our decarbonisation and our pursuit of renewable energy—in that, if we had pursued it faster, perhaps we would have had a little more energy independence. I am struck, when listening to the fine contributions to this debate, that the lessons have already been taught to us this week by the President of the European Commission in her excellent speech.
I know that some of the content of her speech has persuaded many on my own side to reflect on their abandonment of net zero. And I'll quote some parts of the speech: Countries that build economic models on the very premise of the stability and safety they provide are facing a new reality. She went on to say: Take energy prices: none of us is immune to the shocks, both geopolitical and economic, that the war in Iran brings to our populations.
Pain at the pump is hard for our citizens and just another reminder that building our resilience is today's job. Those are wise words. She also went on to say: With geopolitics at a boiling point, we know firsthand that the more you build home-grown energy, the sooner you get independent and thus can shield yourself from energy price shocks.
We are in a race to electrify our economies, and this is what future generations will judge us on. Perhaps in the reflection of our fuel security, which we need to do to transition to net zero, which we need to do to create a cleaner world and not live in our own filth, and the problems of the supply chains in the immediacy, we should also begin to have a serious conversation in the community about what our energy mix looks like—renewable and perhaps other sources of energy.
We will need gas, at least in the medium term, to firm up our grids. And we need to see our economy in a holistic way—what our demands are to keep for our communities—review our supply chains and underpin our industrial economy, but that's not going to be to just find new supply chains in the short term and then wait for the next crisis. I'm a follower of Sir Dieter Helm, a professor at Oxford and an economist, a strong supporter of net zero.
He says, 'The current shocks in this Iranian war are not trends,' which is interesting. He's a classic economist. So, the price is going up in response to supply shocks, and the market will, in effect, find new ways to ration supplies in the short term but then find new supplies.
His thesis is that we may well no longer be dependent on the Middle East as the market readjusts, but we may become dependent on other nations. Whatever your view about sourcing energy security, destroying nature like the Great Australian Bight is not the answer. The PRESIDENT: The question is that the motion moved by Senator Scarr be agreed to.