PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS

Mr REPACHOLI (Hunter) (11:16): I thank my friend the member for Indi for moving this motion about community benefits and the role regional Australia is playing in our energy future. There is one thing I want to make very clear from the start: regional communities deserve straight answers, proper consultation and a fair share when they are asked to host major new infrastructure.

It's just fair. In the Hunter, we know what it means to power this beautiful country. For generations, our coalmines, power station workers, tradies and local businesses have helped keep the lights on here but also around the world.

And, as our energy system changes, the Hunter will keep playing a big role here. But if we're going to ask communities from Wyee, Cameron Park and Cessnock through to Singleton to host new transmission, solar, batteries and other energy infrastructure then those communities need to be part of the conversation from day one. They can't be treated like an afterthought.

We've seen what happens when engagement isn't good enough. At Mitchells Flat, near Singleton, local people raised real concerns about a proposed solar farm on prime agricultural land. Farmers spoke up.

Community groups spoke up. I spoke up. In the end, the developer decided not to proceed at that location.

I said at the time that it was a great project; it was just the wrong location for that one. And that's the point. Supporting renewable energy doesn't mean every project belongs everywhere.

We've got mining land and industrial land right across the Hunter. We should be looking hard at places like that before putting pressure on good farming country. Good engagement means listening before decisions are locked in.

It means talking to the people who live there, not just sending them a brochure when everything's been decided. And community benefit has to really mean something. It should mean local jobs.

It should mean local apprenticeships. It should mean work for local contractors. It should mean opportunity for local manufacturers, truckies, and cafes and other small businesses.

It should mean support for local roads, sporting clubs, community facilities and services, because, when a region hosts infrastructure that will operate for decades, the benefits should last for decades as well. We're already seeing that approach around the Hunter Transmission Project, where work is underway on a benefit-sharing package and opportunities for local businesses and workers.

Regional communities have been asking these questions for a long time. Long before the recent debate about AI data centres, people in places like the Hunter were already asking a simple question: if we're hosting the infrastructure, what does our community get back? The Albanese government has been working on that question.

Through the Capacity Investment Scheme, the government is delivering more than $1.7 billion in shared community benefits, $1.9 billion in First Nations benefits and an estimated $35.8 billion in additional spending on local content and businesses. We've also strengthened the social licence requirements for projects supported through the Capacity Investment Scheme.

Importantly, the Developer Rating Scheme opened to industry in March this year. That scheme is about something I hear regularly from people in the Hunter—who are the good operators? If a developer engages early, deals honestly with landholders and treats the community with respect, that should count for something.

And, if they don't, that also should count for something. The rating scheme gives communities more information and gives developers a reason to lift their game. We've also strengthened the role of the Australian Energy Infrastructure Commissioner and released national guidelines for community engagement and benefits for electricity transmission projects.

But I do agree that we have to keep moving. There are different rules across different states. There are different approaches between different projects, and that can be confusing for communities.

Whatever framework we use, the test should be simple: Does the local community get a genuine say? Are landholders treated fairly? Are local workers and businesses getting opportunities?

Are there real and lasting benefits for the towns doing the heavy lifting? And are developers held to a high standard? That's what matters to me.

The Hunter knows better than most that changes must be practical. The Hunter has powered Australia for generations, and we're proud of that history, and we're proud of the workers who built it. But the next chapter has to be done with regional communities, not to them.

If we get consultation right, put projects in the right places and make sure communities share the benefit, then we'll build stronger projects, stronger communities and stronger systems as well.