E&OE….
Topics: Clean Energy Finance Corporation, Renewable Energy Target, ABC’s Q&A programme
TOM ELLIOTT:
Our next guest is indeed the Federal Environment Minister, Greg Hunt. Mr Hunt, good afternoon.
GREG HUNT:
And good afternoon Tom.
TOM ELLIOTT:
Now I read in your favourite newspaper The Age today that you have told the Clean Energy Finance Corporation that it is not allowed to invest in wind power or small-scale solar energy production. Is that true?
GREG HUNT:
Well let me correct two different things here. First thing, there's the Renewable Energy Target, which is the basis for driving renewable energy in Australia. And people can invest or produce whatever they want. There have been 2.3 million households that have been supported with what's effectively a rebate on their solar panels or solar hot water – completely unchanged, continues absolutely. Then there is Labor's $10 billion green borrowing bank.
And so they borrowed $10 billion and they invested- it was intended to be only in emerging technologies. There's a fabulous quote from Greg Combet here all about the fact that the corporation is not expected to fund these projects, and that is those that generally have a track record. So, in other words, mature technologies. It was meant to be focusing on emerging technologies and all we've done is return it to its focus of large-scale solar, energy efficiency, emerging renewables, things that are really exciting, and that was what it was intended to be.
TOM ELLIOTT:
So is it still funding these things?
GREG HUNT:
Well at the moment it's been dealing a lot with large-scale wind projects that already exist. So of course the Macarthur wind project, it invested millions and millions after this was well underway. So it wasn't creating a project, it was simply transferring borrowed taxpayers funds into an existing project. Whereas we think that the private sector should be doing the vast bulk of investment …
TOM ELLIOTT:
Okay well then on that though …
GREG HUNT:
…in renewable energy, then individuals are able to benefit from the household solar program under the Renewable Energy Target.
TOM ELLIOTT:
Okay. So do you just think- I mean, do you think therefore that- or in your ideal world, would you like to get rid of the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and just let the private sector do it?
GREG HUNT:
Well yes. And that was our policy before the election, and we've taken that bill to the- through the House of Representatives twice and through the Senate. But if it is there it should be focusing on its original intent of emerging technologies – large-scale solar, things which were not going to be able to stand at this stage without additional support, and…
TOM ELLIOTT:
Okay, because I have solar panels on my house, right, and I was able to benefit from a previous scheme – I must say, the panels used to be very expensive, they're much cheaper now.
GREG HUNT:
Correct.
TOM ELLIOTT:
But I paid a lot for the panels, but I got a very generous amount per unit of electricity. I think I get $0.66 or $0.68 a kilowatt. Whereas now you get about $0.08 instead. Now it seems to me, frankly, there would have been no way I would have bought those panels without the government subsidy. Can things like solar and wind profitably exist without a government subsidy?
GREG HUNT:
Well the interesting thing is many claim they can, but then they demand a government subsidy in the same breath. The Renewable Energy Target does provide a rebate, on average, of about 30 per cent of the cost of household solar on the best advice that I have.
TOM ELLIOT:
Okay. But again, but can those things exist- can they exist without subsidies? Or are government subsidies necessary to have renewable energy on a large scale?
GREG HUNT:
Look, generally – although people often claim or that some of the promoters claim that they will stack up without any support – unless there's a Renewable Energy Target or unless there's some other support, they don't seem to be meeting the cost requirements of competition at this stage. That's precisely why we have a Renewable Energy Target.
TOM ELLIOTT:
Right, so fundamentally …
GREG HUNT:
That's the honest answer.
TOM ELLIOTT:
Alright. So fundamentally, what do you want to do? You want the private sector, as Environment Minister, you would prefer the private sector to come up with non-subsidised forms of alternative energy and just let that sort of go into the market?
GREG HUNT:
Well no there are really two things here. Firstly, the Renewable Energy Target is our fundamental support for renewable energy. It's not 20 per cent, as it was always intended to have been, but 23.5 per cent, that was what was agreed. That's the basis for not just any Australian who wants to put solar on their house to go ahead and do that and that continues completely unchanged.
Anybody can go out today or tomorrow and they'll get that rebate but also for large scale solar and large scale wind. But in addition, this extra Clean Energy Finance Corporation shouldn't have been investing in existing wind towers. It was meant to be helping to create additional renewable energy which wouldn't otherwise have existed…
TOM ELLIOTT:
So, are we creating any new types of renewable energy that didn't previously exist? I mean, has that happened?
GREG HUNT:
Oh well, right now there is work on large scale solar. There are proposals afoot, there's research being done on wave energy, tidal energy, geothermal energy. So, things which are very important, energy efficiency.
So, a range of emerging technologies and energy efficiency, these are the things that this additional corporation should be focusing on but in there meantime, what we are seeing is a doubling of large scale renewable energy over the next five years compared with what we've done in the last 15 and the household solar has already got 2.3 million households in it and that will just continue being in place.
TOM ELLIOTT:
On a separate issue, the Prime Minister has banned anybody from the Cabinet, from the frontbench – which you are a member, going on the ABC's Q&A programme. After last night's edition, is that policy likely to change?
GREG HUNT:
Look, I think that what's been agreed here is that if there is a move to take the program from the entertainment to the news division – and I'm not a party to the negotiations – then that will be a reasonable resolution.
I think most people were surprised that they had this person on who wasn't just convicted of threatening to kill a national security officer, an officer of ASIO, but had also made the most vile and incendiary remarks in relation to violence against women and so the Government took a stand. They can – you know, it's a free country, they can do what they want but we don't have to be part of it until there's some sort of recognition…
TOM ELLIOTT:
Well, you still have to pay the bills for it.
GREG HUNT:
Yes we do. Yes we do. But the truth is that we took a position. I think there will now be resolution. It appears that the ABC is going to put a little more rigour. They've recognised that having this fellow on, particularly with both his attitudes in terms of – well, as a convicted criminal who threatened to kill a national security or ASIO officer and such horrendous language about violence against women which was repeated not just – it was repeated after the program so there was no backing down, it wasn't some flight of fantasy, it was an entrenched position which he sort of proudly re-proclaimed afterwards.
So, I think they've realised that was a very poor piece of judgment and if they move from entertainment to news that might provide a little bit more rigour and I think that'll be an elegant resolution.
TOM ELLIOTT:
We will wait and see. Greg Hunt, thank you for your time.
GREG HUNT:
Thanks Tom. Cheers.
TOM ELLIOTT:
Greg Hunt there, Federal Environment Minister.
(ENDS)