TRANSCRIPT - ABC Afternoon Briefing with Greg Jennett

PAUL FLETCHER MP

Shadow Minister for Science and the Arts

Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy

Manager of Opposition Business in the House

TRANSCRIPT

ABC Afternoon Briefing 

23 SEPTEMBER 2024

Greg Jennett: Alright, well we mentioned the Coalition's nuclear power plan earlier in the program and a possible pitch for cheaper beer too. Let's follow up on these and other ideas with regular guest and Liberal frontbencher, Paul Fletcher. Paul joins me now from Sydney. Welcome back to Afternoon Briefing Paul, why don't we start on nuclear? We got the speech from Peter Dutton today, but where and when are the details coming?

Paul Fletcher: Greg, good to be with you. And as Peter Dutton said today, we'll release the full details and costs, when we judge it appropriate. But as Peter pointed out today, independent experts assess the cost of Labor's plan of relying completely on renewables at between$ 1.3 and $1.5 trillion and as Peter also said, we're confident that we can deliver nuclear for, well less than that.

But what he also pointed out was that Labor is falling well behind on its plan to have 82% of electricity coming from renewables by 2030. They need to be financing around 7 gigawatts of capacity, new capacity each year. Last year it was only 1.3 gigawatts. This year they're running at less than half that rate that they need to meet. So Mister Bowen is not doing a very good job of delivering on his plan. Many Australians are looking at that and thinking that's not very plausible.

Greg Jennett: Alright, well let's just zero in on what we can discern about your policy. There were references made by Peter Dutton to an 80-year lifespan or timeframe for nuclear. Does that mean you're going to multiply the cost of each wind turbine or solar panel in, or planned to enter, the grid because they might need to be replaced two to four times over 80 years? Is that how you're going to do the cost match ups here?

Paul Fletcher: Look we've made the point that, for example there are models around such as the CSRIO GenCost model, which uses some assumptions about the relative life of nuclear plants and of renewable energy plants which are actually not consistent with the experience around the world. 

We've also made the point that if you look at a range of countries, and Peter pointed this out today in his speech, if you look at a range of countries and jurisdictions, whether it's France, whether it's Ontario, whether it's Arizona, several of them mentioned in the speech today, they rely on a mix of renewables, nuclear and natural gas.

Now today, Australia's mix is renewables, natural gas and coal. And what we're proposing is that in future it'll be renewables, natural gas and nuclear, with nuclear playing that important baseload role. 

But as Peter Dutton also pointed out today, when you look around the world and you look at somewhere like Ontario, which has over half of its energy coming from nuclear, and people in Ontario are paying the equivalent of around eighteen cents a kilowatt hour compared to in Australia.

In New South Wales, $0.27. In South Australia it's over $0.40. So these international comparisons are very important as we weigh up what the right plan should be for Australia to achieve net zero by 2050.

Greg Jennett: Alright yes. I mean Ontario is blessed with terrain that lends itself to hydro, let's not get too bogged down on that though. Look, just a final one before we move on to supermarkets. Paul Fletcher, you say the details come when appropriate. This calendar year or next?

Paul Fletcher: Well as Peter Dutton has said, as Angus Taylor has said, as a whole range of Coalition frontbenchers have said, we'll release the costings when we judge it's the appropriate time to do so. And the Australian people will have that information in front of them when they stand ready to take a decision.

But we'll also continue to make this point. It's a choice between different paths. And Mister Bowen's path is a very costly path. But also it's a path which manifestly Labor is falling well behind on delivering against what it has promised to deliver.

Greg Jennett: No, I understand that.

Paul Fletcher: One of the things people need to weigh up is which party is more credible in delivering on complex projects.

Greg Jennett: Alright let's see, moving on to supermarkets. The ACCC is proposing to hit Coles and Woolworths where it hurts over these allegedly false advertisements on savings. I take it you think that's a good thing. But I'm wondering, would this conduct be sufficient under your policy to force an application to the courts for forced divestiture? Would this trigger such an application if the coalition's policy was extant?

Paul Fletcher: Well, the first point to make is that obviously the ACCC has significant powers now to deal with anti-competitive conduct in a whole range of industries, including of course, supermarkets. We welcome the regulator doing its job. It's made allegations about Coles and Woolworths having engaged in conduct which was misleading in that it gave consumers the impression that there had been a discount from a recent price.

But the price, according to the ACCC's allegations, against which the discount was quoted was the price that had been recently increased. Now, the ACCC will work that through. It'll be a matter for a court to decide. I'm not going to comment on the details. 

But what I would say is, of course, that we have also announced a policy direction to deal with market power in the supermarket sector. Australia has one of the most concentrated supermarket sectors in the world and we have said that one of the powers that we would give to the ACCC would be, in certain circumstances to warrant divestiture. 

Greg Jennett: Would false advertising, though, be that circumstance?

Paul Fletcher: Well the point I'd make is that when a competition regulator is given powers, then it is for that regulator to determine how it exercises those powers. That's the first point. The second point I'd make is obviously there'll be detail to work through about the triggers that have to be met before a power like divestiture would be exercised.

If you look at the act now, there's a series of powers that the ACCC has and there's a series of triggers under the law as it stands, before it can exercise those powers.

Greg Jennett: Yeah, and obviously the ACCC feels it has those powers around advertising. That's why they've put brought this case today.

Paul Fletcher: They do have a wide suite of existing powers, there's no doubt about that. But we've made the point that we think given the degree of concentration in the supermarket sector, there is a case for additional powers being granted. We brought out a comprehensive policy on that and of course we'll take that to the election.

Greg Jennett: Quick final one. You might have noticed Paul, that David Littleproud's running a pause, or freeze campaign in its infancy on beer excise. It's been raised at the Nationals’ federal conference too. Is that policy? Are the Liberals supporting an excise freeze or cut on beer?

Paul Fletcher: The root cause of beer excise going up is that it's indexed and inflation is rising sharply under this government because Mister Chalmers is not taking the necessary steps to align fiscal policy, government spending, with the monetary policy settings of the Reserve Bank. So our focus is going to be getting inflation down. That will have many benefits as a consequence, including reducing the rate at which indexation, of excise on beer is driving up that excess.

Greg Jennett: Ok look time is going to beat us. I'm not sure whether that will get us to endorsement of an excise freeze. I might leave that and pick it up with others in the Coalition, principally the Nationals. I think Paul Fletcher we’ll have to wrap it up there. We might even return to it in the future. Thanks so much.

Paul Fletcher: Thanks, Greg.