Subjects: Meeting with Port Stephens community members to discuss Labor’s offshore wind proposal in the Hunter; the Albanese Government’s disregard for community consultation; Labor’s cost of living crisis; Daniel Andrews; Qantas; the Prime Minister’s divisive Voice, Treaty, Truth proposal.
E&OE
BRENT HANCOCK:
I want to thank Peter and Angus for coming in today, meeting with the community. We’ve got massive concerns over this wind farm project. All we’re wanting is a voice. Basically, we want to open up community consultation back [inaudible] and let the community have their say.
PETER DUTTON:
Thanks mate. Gus?
ANGUS TAYLOR:
Thanks Brent. It’s great to be here with Brent and the community here at Shoal Bay – who are deeply concerned, with good reason, about what’s happening right here.
As someone who lives in a regional electorate, I’ve seen many energy projects over the course of my career, and I’ve got to say, what I’m seeing here is a completely botched consultation process – a completely botched consultation process – which is treating the citizens here and the community here like second-class citizens.
Now, in regional areas, there need to be strong voices that are heard. This is a government that claims that it listens to local voices – well here’s an opportunity, here’s an opportunity. Because the local voices here are making their views very clear, which is they want to be heard, they want a proper consultation process – and they thoroughly deserve it.
This is a beautiful, beautiful part of the world. It’s extraordinary, right where we are here today, and everyone here wants to protect it, preserve the very best parts of it. I don’t think there’s anyone here who is against good energy projects. We all need to see good energy projects right across Australia, but local communities need to be heard.
If I can, I’ll just make a brief comment about cost of living pressures. We are seeing inflation data coming out a little later today, and we are seeing on the ground, enormous cost of living pressures on Australians. The cost of fuel, in particular, has been skyrocketing for Australians, most people paying over $2.20 a litre, now – I certainly did yesterday for diesel – and those pressures are continuing to intensify, but we have a government that is distracted: a government whose priorities are not the priorities of middle Australia, are and not the priorities of those Australians trying to make ends meet, and if that’s not their priority, we’re going to continue to see these persistent inflation pressures in place. There is much that government can do, it shouldn’t be leaving it to the Reserve Bank to continue to keep high interest rates. We need a government that isn’t distracted. We need a government that treats bringing down those cost of living pressures as their first, second and third priority.
PETER DUTTON:
Thanks, Angus. Thank you very much to Brent as well, and to all of those we met with this morning here at the club.
This is a pretty amazing region, and the passion in the room this morning was quite obvious. The anger is obvious as well, and, rightly so, because the consultation process just hasn’t been up to scratch, and I think this is another project where Chris Bown has misread the community. He’s acting against the best interests of this region, and this project needs to be put on hold until a proper consultation process can be undertaken.
The residents here this morning are just desperate to make sure that they can save Port Stephens. This is the reality for their businesses. They’re talking about whale migration disruption, they’re talking about disruption to commercial and recreational fishing. There is an enormous reliance in this local community on tourism, on fishing, and on a continuation of the pristine environment as we know it. There’s been inadequate environmental considerations taken into account. The locals here just haven’t been consulted in a way that is respectful. There’s no social licence for this project. The local member is missing in action, and I think people right up and down the coast are particularly concerned that they are being treated as second class citizens.
I think it’s incumbent on the Prime Minister to visit the region, to sit down – as we’ve done this morning – to hear the local concerns, and to stop this project until the consultation can be properly conducted and people can be treated with the respect that they deserve. That’s why I think this campaign is just kicking off. We all support – as Angus rightly points out –renewable projects, but they can’t be at the cost of destroying the environment and making sure that it brings an end to what is a very sustainable but growing sector as well that the local community here relies on with the people we’ve spoken with this morning.
There are literally tens of thousands of tourists who come here to go out on boats and to enjoy what every family wants to enjoy, what every tourist wants to enjoy, and that is an uninterrupted environmental asset that we see before us.
So, I’m really pleased and very grateful for the engagement that we’ve had this morning, and I think this is the first of many conversations that we’ll be having in relation to what I think is a crucial issue.
I’m happy to take questions on this or other issues.
QUESTION:
The Government claims that it has run a fair consultation process, it’s reduced the size of the wind zone, and it’s pushed it offshore to at least 20 kilometres. Is it a bit too late?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, why don’t I ask Brent to comment on that, just in terms of the adequacy of the process and where it’s located.
BRENT HANCOCK:
To be honest, if you have the community outcry, there hasn’t been adequate consultation whatsoever, and that’s what we’re asking for. We’re asking for more consultation, and to consult the community. Obviously where it’s being moved to, it just affects so many businesses, the community, and obviously tourism here in Port Stephens, so we’re simply asking to save Port Stephens and open up that community consultation.
QUESTION:
So, would you like to pushed out even further than 20 kilometres, or scrapped entirely?
BRENT HANCOCK:
To be honest with you, it just needs to be scrapped. And it needs to go back to the drawing board and it needs to be consulted with the community, because to be honest with you, where it is, it doesn’t suit Port Stephens at all. You can see how beautiful Port Stephens is, it just doesn’t sit right. It just needs to be scrapped entirely, go back to the drawing board, and start again.
QUESTION:
What impact would it have for you personally if it proceeds in the way that it would at the moment?
BRENT HANCOCK:
Yeah, sure. So, it’ll affect my business. Port Stephens is a large game fishing area, so we have two tournaments per year in February, back to back, and there was a survey done by the New South Wales Game Fishing Association back in 2011, that brought $19 million to this economy over those two week periods.
QUESTION:
And so, I guess, if you don’t want to see it here at all, what kind of resolution do you think we can find?
BRENT HANCOCK:
I think there’s plenty of resolutions as far as renewable energy is concerned, definitely. I think it all just needs to go back to the drawing board. Like I said, the community outcry, the community needs to be consulted.
QUESTION:
Mr Dutton, you spoke about the importance of the tourism economy for Port Stephens, down in Newcastle people talk about the potential of this project to create almost three and a half thousand jobs. Do you have an alternative to this project in terms of job creation?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, I think we demonstrated the alternative when we were in government. The Kurri Kurri project, obviously will create local jobs, and there are other projects. There are solar projects and other onshore wind turbine proposals that can be looked at. We’ve obviously proposed the latest generation, small modular reactors that you can plug and play into the existing distribution network so you don’t have the 28,000 kilometres of new poles and wires.
As all Australians know, the Prime Minister promised a reduction in the power prices of $275. People’s power in New South Wales have gone up by 25 per cent, their gas bills have gone up, and their electricity bills will continue to go up under this Government, because you talk about $100 billion worth of new poles and wires, and the whole project that they’re embarking on at the moment is at a cost of about $1.2 to $1.5 trillion. So, if you think the power price is high now, wait for the next two, three, five, ten years.
So, there are plenty of projects where we can create jobs and we can continue to do that, but we don’t need to destroy the environment of Port Stephens to create jobs on the mainland. The fact is that in some cases, just given the geography, it can’t go any further out because of the continental shelf, we don’t know yet where the cables will be coming in, whether they will be onshore, which beach they will come through, and that’s a very important consideration.
The community here doesn’t understand from the Government – the Government certainly hasn’t provided any explanation as to where the cables from the 300 or 400 wind turbines will be onshore. What will that do to the seabed between here and the 20 kilometre point where this zone is created? There are plenty of questions that rightly being asked by the community and Mr Bowen’s refusing to answer any of them, and the consultation process was supposed to have addressed some of that, but clearly it just hasn’t.
QUESTION:
Are you against offshore wind or just the consultation?
PETER DUTTON:
I believe that there needs to be a social licence – first point – for communities like this where there’s a massive disruption to the way of life, to the way in which people earn their money, and so there are appropriate projects where wind might be a solution, but as we know, with the turbines out there – just given the conditions: the erosion, the environmental impact, the blades need to be replaced, they go into landfill, there’s a 17 to 20 year lifespan to amortise the cost. They can’t be run when the wind’s too strong or the wind’s not strong enough. So there are plenty of environmentalists around who are questioning the benefits, and that’s a community debate that we should continue to have.
In relation to this project, I think the major concern is that it’s very obvious that there has not been adequate consultation with the community, and I think the Government’s treating this region with great disdain at the moment and they should open up the consultation process. The fact that the proponent is given licence without there being any consultation, or adequate consultation with the community, is not something the community would accept.
QUESTION:
Is the Albanese Government going to lose support from voters in this area?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, I think the main thing is that this project is stopped now and the consultation begins. That way, the community could have a fair say to express their concerns, and everybody from the fishermen right through to the local tourist operators can have their say. We need to understand where all these cables will be onshore. Which beaches will they come up through? What’s the environmental impact to go through traditional lands? Have the Indigenous owners been consulted in relation to that aspect? There’s just, frankly, I mean, every time that Chris Bowen speaks, it provides, you know, really an opportunity for more questions to be asked than answers provided, and I think this is a real disaster that’s unfolding, and I think the community here is rightly very upset.
QUESTION:
And so, what are you going to do after this morning’s meeting?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, we can call on the Government to act reasonably, and to put the politics aside, and to come here into the community and to listen respectfully. We don’t have the numbers in the lower house, as you know, and in the Senate, if the Government’s got the support of Mr Pocock and the Greens etc., they can force through or ram through whatever they want. But that shouldn’t be what the Government is doing on a project like this – it’s too environmentally sensitive, and the impact too great on local tourism and other businesses who operate in the region.
QUESTION:
You mention the Hunter power project [inaudible]. That was a project that the Coalition launched, I think it was initially meant to cost $600 million, it’s now [inaudible]. Are you surprised that it’s [inaudible].
PETER DUTTON:
Well, I just think if you look at many of the things that Labor is touching at the moment, they are going to be [inaudible]. They’ve had two budgets, they’ve made economic decisions which have made it incredibly hard for Australians to pay their bills. If you’re driving to work this morning, or coming home of a night time, when you fill up your HiLux or your Ranger, you’re paying now over $2.20 a litre for diesel. Families are paying much more for their mortgages under Labor, that’s the reality. There are many other aspects – insurance, gas prices – that are really making it very difficult for businesses, small businesses in particular, to keep their doors open, and for families to be able to balance their budget as well. So, I think there’s a long list and a growing list of disasters on the Prime Minister’s watch and seems that he’s got the Midas touch in reverse.
QUESTION:
Can we get your comments on Daniel Andrews’ resignation?
PETER DUTTON:
I think for the people in Victoria, for the great state of Victoria, this is an opportunity to reset and to have somebody with integrity into the office. Obviously that’s a decision for the Labor Party to make, but the unions are coming together, and in a completely undemocratic way, they will decide who will be the next Premier of Victoria. I hope that it’s an opportunity for Victorians to have pride again in their Government and their Premier, because the amount of debt that’s been left behind, is crippling, and that will be Daniel Andrews’ legacy: generations of debt and no end of deficits in sight. I think it will be a huge sigh of relief for Victorians that Daniel Andrews has gone off to the next job.
QUESTION:
What do you make of Alan Joyce skipping out on the Senate Inquiry? And do you think it’s time for the Qantas Chair to step down?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, I do think Mr Joyce should front the Inquiry. I think that’s important, and I think it’s necessary because the close relationship the Prime Minister has with Mr Joyce has obviously been subject to a lot of public speculation, been on the red carpet together regularly, they’re at all of these black tie events. The fact is that Australians are paying more for their airfares now because of the Government’s decision to exclude Qatar from coming into our country.
A region like this would benefit considerably from additional inbound tourism, because those tourists come to regions right up and down the coast to spend money on accommodation, in restaurants, they spend money on fishing charters, and they would be a very important part of keeping the economy going.
So, I don’t understand the decision that they’ve made, but frankly, I don’t think either does the Minister. There has been so many announcements about why the Government decided to exclude Qatar, but I think the public at the moment is rightly angry about the relationship between the Prime Minister and Mr Joyce, and Mr Joyce should front the inquiry and answer the reasonable questions that have been put.
QUESTION:
Do you think that the Chair should step aside?
PETER DUTTON:
I think that’s an issue for the shareholders.
QUESTION:
And just on Noel Pearson saying that the Referendum is the ‘last, best hope’ for reconciliation, what will you do to advance reconciliation, if a ‘no’ vote is returned?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, in Alice Springs and Tennant Creek, in Laverton and Leonora, in those communities that are most acutely impacted, I want to make sure that those young kids can lead a life that we would expect our kids to lead in a capital city or in a regional town. I want there to be an opportunity for those kids to go into a good job. I want industry and the business sector to prosper there so that there can be a thriving economy, so that people can afford to buy houses. So, that’s what I want.
At the moment, we’ve got a debacle, frankly, in the Yes campaign meantime. You’ve got Mr Pearson coming out with a different version of what the Voice will be every other day. I mean, yesterday he was talking about local voices, which was actually recommendation of the Calma-Langton Report, and the recommendation in the report was the local voices should be heard well before you think anything about going to a referendum.
So, I don’t understand how the Yes case can argue to the Australian public that you could have a design of the Voice taking place after the vote on the Saturday for six months. It would make more sense to have designed the Voice so that people can understand what it is they’re being asked to vote for. I think the fact that the Prime Minister has made a deliberate decision to stop Australians from having the information that they need when they vote on the 14th of October, that’s a strange way of doing business, and I think it’s why there are a lot of senior people in the Labor Party now who are speaking with journalists that are asking how on earth has Anthony Albanese turned 60 per cent support into 40 per cent?
I hope that Australians vote against the proposed change because it will be the most significant change to our nation’s rulebook in our country’s history, and there’s no detail about how it will work, how it will operate. It’s open to interpretation – very broad interpretation – by the High Court, and it wouldn’t deliver the practical outcomes that we all want for people living in particularly remote Indigenous communities.
QUESTION:
Are you comfortable with how your No campaign has conducted itself, given accusations of disinformation and misinformation?
PETER DUTTON:
Well, I’ve condemned people – whether they’re on the ‘yes’ case or the ‘no’ case – where they’ve not treated people respectfully and where there’s been misinformation or disinformation. Nobody has any tolerance for that whatsoever, and people should conduct themselves in a respectful way. I have a great deal of respect for Australians, whether they’re saying ‘yes’ or ‘no’. I advocate very strongly that people should vote ‘no’, because I just don’t believe it’s in our country’s best interests for this Voice Referendum to get up, and I think increasingly, Indigenous voices are saying exactly that. We were in Dubbo and Moree over the last couple of days, and speaking to Indigenous leaders there, they’re not in favour of the Voice and a Canberra Voice is not going to benefit people living in regional areas. I think the Prime Minister’s lack of respect for the Australian public in not giving the detail has really switched a lot of people who otherwise would have voted ‘yes’ into ‘no’ voters.
Thanks very much.
[ends]