E&OE….
Topics: $985,000 funding for Rippon Lea House & Gardens, Clean Energy Finance Corporation, Shenhua Watermark mine approval, post-2020 emissions reduction targets
GREG HUNT:
I’m delighted to be here at Rippon Lea with Martin Purslow and Michael Batchelor from the Victorian National Trust. This is one of not just Melbourne’s, not just Victoria’s but one of Australia’s great heritage properties. Under the Protecting National Historic Sites programme, all up we're allocating nearly $9 million for 18 of Australia's 103 national heritage sites.
Today, we are announcing $985,000 for the conservation, improvement and restoration of the magnificent Rippon Lea property. That's work for the buildings, and the gardens, the coach house, for making this property a gift to the next generation and to our descendants a century from now.
Heritage is one of the four great pillars of our national environment program. Clean air, clean land, clean water and heritage. And there are no greater conservators, no better stewards, no more committed custodians than the National Trust. So I'm delighted to invite Martin to say a few words. After that we'd be happy to take any questions about the programme and if there are broader questions, I will deal with them after that.
MARTIN PURSLOW:
On behalf of the National Trust of Australia here in Victoria, I'd just like to thank Minister Hunt for this fantastic announcement that's made today. $980,000 or thereabouts for the project here at Rippon Lea. On top of that, that money will unlock a further $1.3 million so we're looking at $2.3 million worth of investment in this, one of our most significant sites in Australia out of the 400 sites that the National Trust looks after over the whole of Australia.
It will see, as Minister Hunt has said, the restoration of considerable areas of the house, the opening up at the rear of the site for the first time in our history so that people can gain access from Elsternwick station nearby. The creation of new facilities here, reusing some of the existing heritage buildings that have fallen on hard times. One of the key buildings that's going to be relocated and built here is the old Caulfield Park conservatory which will be rebuilt on this project to provide a 120-space cafe and a new community hub for this property.
We already attract over 100,000 visitors to this property and we already attract over 20,000 schoolchildren to this property. So education here is very, very important. This project will provide an additional space which is dedicated for educational uses at the site which we will see grow over the next 10, 15, 20 years.
This is investment now in a heritage property from the 1860s that will see this site be relevant and dynamic and an exciting part of the community for many, many years to come. So on behalf of the National Trust movement, its members and all of the National Trust sites across this country, I'd like to thank our government and Greg Hunt, thank you.
GREG HUNT:
It's a pleasure. Now any questions about Rippon Lea? Or more broader questions?
JOURNALIST:
Have you spoken to Barnaby Joyce yet about the Watermark coal mine and what do you make of his call for the New South Wales government to step in?
GREG HUNT:
We've actually spoken consistently over many, many months, numerous discussions. I visited the site with him and precisely because of his representations and the community, we deferred the process. We made not just one but two rounds of submissions containing community questions to the Independent Expert Scientific Committee. They were categorical in their responses. And I respect his approach on this. He's had a long-standing view.
Primarily, a concern about the discretionary New South Wales land planning process. That was where the decision was made. This was a New South Wales program, started by the New South Wales ALP, confirmed by the New South Wales current government. We have stage 15 of 17 processes and he has been of a view all along and I really deeply respect it, he's a good, decent, honourable man who's always understood that the Federal process is a statutory process, it's not a discretionary process.
With six different scientific reports, with legal advice and with departmental advice, no Federal Environment Minister could have reached a different decision. But of course, as a person who has a committed view on this, it's entirely reasonable that he approaches the New South Wales Government.
JOURNALIST:
Would you tell him the fight is over, there's no chance now?
GREG HUNT:
I think it's entirely a matter for him. I wouldn't try to instruct him what to do. You've got to be true to yourself. And the point here is, this is somebody who is decent and honourable and has always held a view. His primary fight has been with the New South Wales land planning process and that New South Wales land planning process was a Labor process.
We have a statutory role, stage 15 of 17, and with six scientific reports, with legal advice, with departmental advice, any decision other than the one we made would have been challenged and on all advice that I have, rejected by the courts. The strongest conditions in Australian history could well have been stripped away and so therefore, there's a clear understanding that at the end of the day, we are but one tiny part, one out of 17 steps in a New South Wales-led process.
JOURNALIST:
He described the decision as mad. Do you see that as perhaps a personal attack on you, or – obviously it's pretty strongly worded criticism to come from someone who does sit in Cabinet?
GREG HUNT:
No, I don't at all. We actually speak regularly. We've spoken twice in the last week. And it's an incredibly positive civil relationship. I really like him. Like I really like him. He's an incredibly decent guy and passionate and people should be proud to have a representative such as that. His real frustration, as he keeps stressing to me, is there is a New South Wales land planning process, started by the ALP, continued by the current government.
He doesn't agree with that, but he also knows and has confirmed that the Federal statutory process is not a discretionary one, that when the advice is as clear and categorical and the safeguards are as absolute as these, that no Environment Minister could come to a different decision under the law, under the advice.
JOURNALIST:
What do you think is uglier and noisier, a wind farm or an open-cut coal mine?
GREG HUNT:
Look, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I have said that. I'm not in the business of making aesthetic judgements. My task, my role, my duty, my responsibility is to administer the Federal environment law and we've just completed negotiations which allow the Renewable Energy Target to be not 20 per cent but 23.5 per cent. And you know I have a very clear and strong and passionate belief in the role of renewable energy and we've already seen renewable energy projects announced since the target was completed.
JOURNALIST:
Can you explain why you want the Clean Energy Finance Corporation to move funding away from wind and small-scale solar?
GREG HUNT:
Well, its purpose was always to focus on innovation and emerging technologies. I think people might be a little surprised to understand that borrowed taxpayers' money was invested in an existing wind farm. The purpose of having a government entity, which of course it's not been our position to support because we thought it was not creating any additional renewable energy, it was simply displacing one form of renewable energy with another.
The purpose of it, though, is to support innovative and emerging technology, and precisely as was tabled in the Senate, we have asked it to focus on its core mandate of emerging and innovative renewable energy technology. Large-scale solar is something that I think the vast majority of Australians would be pleased and delighted to support.
JOURNALIST:
Mr Hunt, the objective of the Clean Energy Finance Corp Act actually says its role is to facilitate increased flows of finance into the clean energy sector. It doesn't go on to define any particular technology except for ruling out nuclear and clean coal technology, so why are you guys now putting definitions on it, the Act doesn't?
GREG HUNT:
I think if you go back to the original debate in Parliament, if you go back to the Hansard, there was a focus on emerging and innovative technology. It was meant to fill market gaps. With the Renewable Energy Target resolved with not a 20 per cent but a 23.5 per cent Renewable Energy Target, we're already seeing significant flows of funding unlocked.
It was the solar sector that said they felt they had gaps coming out of the Renewable Energy Target, that wind was so well advanced that they would struggle to compete, and so supporting large-scale solar is something that I think is tremendously important and I'm pleased that we're supporting large-scale solar.
JOURNALIST:
Won't the changes damage the small-scale industry and prevent research and development?
GREG HUNT:
No, not at all. The small-scale sector is going at a very solid pace. It was predicted that it would achieve a figure of about 4000 gigawatt hours of small-scale solar by 2020. The latest advice is we're now looking at 10,000, 11,000 or even 12,000 gigawatt hours of small-scale solar by 2020. So it's likely to achieve between two and three times what was intended and predicted at the time the Renewable Energy Target was created.
The Renewable Energy Target is the vehicle, and it is achieving precisely what it was the tended to achieve for small-scale solar. Any Australian, anywhere, at any time can access the Renewable Energy Target for small-scale solar. That's what's intended, that's what's working and that's what is seeing us not just double but potentially triple the deployment of solar panels around the country.
JOURNALIST:
Without that Federal funding, won't solar companies have to bump up prices and therefore price out families who are wanting to install solar panels?
GREG HUNT:
No, there is actually through the Renewable Energy Target, precisely the rebate that you're talking about. What we're seeing here is that this is allowing the missing area, the large-scale solar, which has lagged in Australia, to be an area of national growth.
Everybody keeps saying to us why aren't you supporting large-scale solar? Now, the very people who say we want large-scale solar, whether it's the ALP or the Greens, are suddenly acting against large-scale solar. I would put it to Bill Shorten – what have you got against large-scale solar?
JOURNALIST:
Just on the investment mandate, does it rule out new emerging technologies in wind energy such as different turbine designs, off-shore wind projects, more efficient turbines?
GREG HUNT:
Look, I'll leave the detail of that to the responsible Minister, Minister Cormann. Let me just go back to this point. Bill Shorten, why are you against large-scale solar? That's the question for today. For all of the games, for all of the tricks, there's a simple question.
Do you support large-scale solar, Mr Shorten? Because all the advice we have is that under the current Renewable Energy Target, without the support of the CEFC, large-scale solar will not be able to achieve the goals that many have for it.
JOURNALIST:
But I guess isn't the problem that just defining emerging technology is a pretty broad statement and can be in the eye of the beholder here, so there's plenty of emerging technology.
GREG HUNT:
Well it's currently a draft process that's in discussion between the Minister and the CEFC so I won't intervene in that. But I love large-scale solar and I love renewable energy. My question is why is the ALP now trying to take steps which would impact, make it more difficult, make it more challenging for large-scale solar to get off the ground? That's what I think Australians ought to ask them in return. I'll take two more questions and then I really do have to go.
JOURNALIST:
If the Corporation's being directed to invest in emerging technologies, how is that different from the Australian Renewable Energy Agency?
GREG HUNT:
No, one is about deployment, one is about development.
JOURNALIST:
The Government has the double dissolution trigger on the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, would you be prepared to take the discussion to an election?
GREG HUNT:
Look, we've had a very clear view on this, but we're a Government that wants to run a full term.
JOURNALIST:
Minister, has the Government pushed back the announcement of the post-2020 emissions reduction target? Apparently you'd said that it will be before 20 July but the Prime Minister says it will be in August.
GREG HUNT:
Look, we're currently going through that. It will be in the coming weeks. We're actually ahead of where I had hoped to be, we're in a remarkably strong position. We will have a strong and I think more ambitious target than others would have previously expected so I couldn’t be more pleased and more delighted.
Alright, thank you very much, before we all get rained out. Thanks a lot.
(ENDS)