Energy Security

Mr PATTERSON (Morphett) (14:09): My question is also to the Premier. Does the Premier take responsibility for keeping the lights on in South Australia this summer? With your leave, sir, and that of the house, I will explain.

Leave granted.

Mr PATTERSON: It was reported in The Advertiser today that the Premier declared, and I quote, 'I don't think premiers should shirk responsibility—I absolutely think we've got a role to play.'

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS (Croydon—Premier) (14:10): I thank the shadow minister for his question. Yes, of course, you can't aspire to be the Premier of the state and then, at the first available opportunity on any matter, seek to shirk responsibility. You should speak about matters with candour and accept responsibility for errors which are reasonably within your control. What is rather frustrating in respect of an energy policy—

The Hon. J.A.W. Gardner: Do you accept responsibility for ramping?

The SPEAKER: Member for Morialta, you have had two warnings.

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: What is frustrating in respect to energy policy—and this is the context I was making my remarks at the Bush Summit yesterday—is that at a federal level what we have seen is energy policy and a political context being principally driven by the climate wars. The implication of the climate wars is probably one of the biggest public policy disasters we have ever seen in the history of our country, namely that we have not had a consistent set of rules or conditions to motivate or stimulate investment, particularly when it comes to energy generation. That lack of consistency and the subsequent underinvestment in generation has now put the country and participants in the National Electricity Market in a precarious position.

South Australia, of course, has adopted a position of leadership when it comes to the energy transition, something that puts us in good stead when it comes to attracting investment globally. We know that capital is on the move around the world, and they are orientating their predisposition to invest in jurisdictions that take climate change seriously. On this side of the house, what I would say is that there is a degree of consistency. Each and every member of this government believes that climate change is real. Each and every member believes that there is an obligation to do something about it, and formulating a coherent policy that facilitates the transition for decarbonisation is something that we all committed to.

I don't know if that is something that the people on the other side of the house can say about their own federal colleagues. We have seen coalition Prime Ministers walking into the federal parliament, calling the big battery 'the big banana'. We have seen federal coalition ministers walking into parliaments, waving around lumps of coal, and that has got us absolutely nowhere. What we rather would like to see is a set of rules in place that do acknowledge that the energy transition to decarbonise is necessary and good and something that this country has the capability to be a global leader in—put the rules in place and allow the market to do its thing and investments to occur accordingly.

But for whatever reason, the coalition on the other side of the house seem to be increasingly more occupied by the conspiracy theorists, those who do not accept the science, the climate change deniers, and their policy manifests itself in creating an environment—

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Morialta!

The Hon. P.B. MALINAUSKAS: —that undermines investment rather than strengthens it. On this side of the house, we accept the responsibility in a modern economy that the energy transition is required and necessary.

The SPEAKER: Excuse me, Premier, can you just be seated? The member for Morialta, I have given you warning after warning after warning, and we will see you after question time.

The honourable member for Morialta having withdrawn from the chamber: