12 September 2023

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS (16:18): I rise on behalf of the Greens in support of this bill. I think it is important to reflect, in talking on this bill, on the impact of the climate crisis on our state and, indeed, our planet. This is a crisis that is already negatively impacting all aspects of modern life, contributing to the destruction of ecosystems, biodiversity and human societies through sea level rises, extreme weather events, changing weather patterns and posing a significant threat to food security, water, the economy, social cohesion and the wellbeing of humans and all other things on this planet, and these impacts will only get worse in the months and years ahead.

We often reflect on the huge disruption that we have seen in our society as a result of COVID, between 2020 and 2022 in particular, but that was really the curtain-raiser for the climate crisis. That really is the tip of the iceberg when one considers the huge disruption that will flow to our economies and to our societies if we do not address the climate crisis. We need to transform Australia into a greenhouse powerhouse, a greenhouse-gas-negative powerhouse, that creates new jobs and a cleaner planet.

Australia and South Australia's climate policy must be consistent with our commitment under the Paris Agreement to pursue efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5° Celsius above pre-industrial levels. Multiple independent analyses show that the Earth's average surface temperature has already warmed by about 1.1° Celsius since the start of the Industrial Revolution in 1850. That is a significant amount. A nationwide systemic response is required to drastically reduce emissions from all sectors, including the energy sector, draw down greenhouse gases and be greenhouse gas neutral or negative by 2035.

Australia has the capacity to ensure that all our energy needs can be provided by renewable sources. I know that the emissions reduction targets in South Australia, as set by the Malinauskas government, are 50 per cent by 2030, from 2005 levels, and net zero emissions by 2050. This is a start but it just is not enough. We know we need to cut our emissions by 75 per cent by 2030, based on 2005 levels, and reach net zero by 2035, and that is what the Greens have been pushing for in Canberra and, of course, here in this place.

I will say, though, it is a relief to me, and I am sure to many Australians who care about the future of our planet, that we are finally seeing some movement on the climate crisis after the years of the Morrison, Abbott and Turnbull governments—the failed governments in Canberra. It is appropriate, I think, for me to reference the Morrison government's climate record, and I want to refer in particular to a report from the Climate Council on a catastrophic failure, 'The Lost Years: Counting the costs of climate inaction in Australia'. This report from the Climate Council, issued in 2022, found that the federal Liberal-National government has overwhelmingly failed on climate action over its three terms of government.

The report contained a national poll of 1,299 Australians, conducted by the Climate Council, and it showed that, on average, Australians rated the Morrison government's performance on climate change and its response to worsening extreme weather events as three out of 10. I think that is actually generous, based on what they did—the complete failure of leadership we saw from that government. One in four (26 per cent) surveyed rated the Morrison government as zero for doing absolutely nothing at all. Among 18 to 25 year olds, the average score was 1.5. Of the 1,299 surveyed, no segment (by age, voting preference or location) rated the government as more than 4.8 out of 10. How pathetic.

That is because the Australian people figured out the Morrison government. They got them right, they dispatched them at the ballot box and they recognised that this was a party being dominated by fossil fuels and by fossil fools: people who were not watching the climate science, people who were completely out of touch with mainstream opinion and the need to address the climate crisis. So whilst it is disappointing that we are not going far enough in our response to this climate catastrophe, at least we are finally seeing some movement, and I certainly welcome that.

I do want to express some alarm, though, at the Labor Party's obsession with gas in South Australia. I am not surprised: some in the Labor Party do love their hot air—they do enjoy a bit of hot air. Their obsession with gas is disappointing, because what we need to do is end gas connections for new homes by 2025, as the Greens have been calling for.

They are talking a lot about green hydrogen, and I am interested in learning more about that, interested in learning more about their plans, but the reality is that we simply cannot have an approach to tackling the climate crisis in our state that is based on natural gas being propped up and propping up the natural gas industry. The Labor Party does need to do better. That said, I welcome this legislation as some movement in the right direction. The Greens will continue to push for 75 per cent reductions. That is what the people of our state want, that is what is necessary for getting this climate crisis under control.

Privatisation of South Australia's energy has delivered high electricity prices and poorly maintained infrastructure.

Since ETSA was privatised in 1999 electricity prices have surged while South Australia’s private transmission company Electranet and private distribution company SA Power Networks have made billions of dollars in profit.

Essential services like electricity should not be in private hands and run for profit. The Greens have a plan to reverse privatisation of our electricity system and save the average South Australian hundreds of dollars each year by redistributing private profit back towards cheaper electricity bills.

The Greens are campaigning to:

• revive the Electricity Trust of South Australia as the sole public retailer and network provider for South Australia’s electricity system.
• phase out private electricity retailers over two years.
• bring South Australia’s electricity distribution and transmission network back into public hands and under the control of ETSA.
• establish ETSA as a statutory authority with a board comprised of at least two worker and consumer representatives.
• direct ETSA to run at cost, eliminating profit from the system and cutting the average power bill.

In Parliament I’ve moved a motion calling on the State Government to establish a commission of inquiry to examine bringing back ETSA so that we can put SA’s electricity back in public hands, where it belongs. You can watch my speech introducing the motion here.

23 March 2023

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: I want to thank honourable members for their contributions: the Hon. Connie Bonaros, the Hon. Clare Scriven and the Hon. Heidi Girolamo. As has been mentioned, the purpose of this bill really is to ensure that private mines are subject to the same consultation requirements as other mines and in particular ensure that they are required to consider the implications for the environment and health—two issues that are very important, particularly in the community around White Rock Quarry.

We have talked a bit about being tongue-tied today and tongue twisters; White Rock Quarry is a tongue twister. There has been a significant community campaign addressing the issues and the effects of the mine. The Hon. Connie Bonaros, in her remarks, queried whether it would be possible to get an update on where things are up to with White Rock Quarry. I can advise the honourable member that on 7 December 2022 there was a call from the Back Off campaign to treat private mines the same as other mines, which my bill reflects.

In September 2022, White Rock Quarry issued a warning that there was blasting occurring near the area of Pizey's Knob, which is close to the nesting grounds for falcons and a spring that flows into the main cave. I understand there have also been community meetings with the mining corporation, so there are ongoing community concerns. Whilst this bill would not prevent private mines, it would ensure that they are subject to the same requirements as other mines, and I think that is entirely appropriate.

I recognise that there is obviously not the support for this bill to advance within this place. I think that is disappointing. I think voters in the community of Bragg will be particularly disappointed with the Liberal Party's position given White Rock Quarry sits within that electorate. I think voters will also be intrigued by the position of the Labor Party because when they were in opposition, while they did not support the bill, I do want to revisit the remarks that were made at that time by the Hon. Clare Scriven on behalf of the minister in the other place. At the time the bill came to a vote, she said:

We want to understand the impacts so that we can ensure that any changes made have the best possible outcomes for all affected parties. The opposition's preference—

that is, the Labor Party's at that time—

would be that we actually have a select committee look into this, but, of course, we are at the very end of a parliamentary session. It is therefore not feasible for a suitable select committee to be established to investigate and report within the time frame. However, I do want to put on the record that that would be a possible future action in regard to this matter.

In summary, while we cannot support this bill at this time, we are very keen to have a detailed and robust investigation in the future with a view to making changes that will address the issues that are raised with this current difference between the definitions but that will have the evidence and research behind it to ensure that we do get the best possible outcome.

The honourable member and indeed the Labor Party are now in government, so they are in a position to initiate such an investigation. Certainly, were they to establish a committee, the Greens would be very keen to be involved, and were they to inquire further into these issues, we would certainly welcome that. It is not sufficient to simply say no. I hope that the Labor Party, now they are in government, will actually look into the matter, establish a committee if they see fit and investigate through the other means that are available to them in government.

I do want to thank the Hon. Connie Bonaros, in particular, and the SA-Best party for the strong and consistent position they have taken on this and the support they have provided to the community campaign. With that, I conclude my remarks.

9 March 2023

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: I rise to indicate the Greens' support for this bill, which will introduce a ministerial reliability instrument in other states that is already in place here in South Australia. In the transition to renewable energy, the stability of electricity is vital. This bill allows energy ministers to intervene three years before a predicted failure in the energy market.

We have seen successes here in South Australia in producing and supplying high levels of renewable energy. In 15 years we have shifted from 1 per cent renewable energy to almost 65 per cent of South Australia's power coming from wind, rooftop solar, large-scale solar and battery storage.

A renewable, reliable grid is vital to our state's energy needs. This bill allows the national energy market to implement reliability instruments, as is already done here in South Australia. Reliable energy ensures the demands of consumers can be met consistently. The ministerial reliability instrument is only for stability issues that can be forecast and thus it will not provide outcomes for storm-related blackouts, such as those that were experienced by South Australia last year.

According to the Australian Energy Regulator, there are currently three reliability instruments in place for South Australia for 2024, 2025 and 2026. A reliability instrument was in place for the current period but has been revoked. Many of these reliability instruments are revoked before implementation as the need no longer exists. What this shows us is that this is a safeguard mechanism that is only enacted when necessary. The Greens will be supporting this bill to ensure ministers can step in to provide safeguards for a reliable network in the transition to renewable energy.

But I do want to point out that it will take more than this bill to provide security for South Australians in terms of our state's energy needs. Some months ago, I proposed here in this place that the government hold a commission of inquiry into bringing back ETSA. We have seen, since the privatisation of our electricity network 20-odd years ago, the disaster that has faced South Australian consumers in terms of skyrocketing costs and the unreliability of the network. Indeed, our electricity network cannot even weather a storm.

So we need to bring our electricity network back into public hands, and the South Australian people should own the distribution and production of that network. That is precisely why the Greens have been advocating to bring back ETSA. Unfortunately, that is a position that is opposed by both of the major parties in this place. I am not sure why. They seem to be beholden to corporate interests rather than the interests of the South Australians they represent.

That said, the Greens will continue to push for public ownership of electricity. We believe that public assets belong in public hands. That is the way that we guarantee the stability of our network. But, that said, we will support the legislation that has been proposed by the government.

30 November 2022

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: First off the bat, the Greens will not support the Liberal Party's amendment, which I submit is designed to rob the motion of its veracity, and is in keeping with the Liberal Party's revisionist view of South Australian history, this idea that they cannot take any responsibility for the original sin that has bedevilled our electricity network in this state, that is, of course, the disastrous decision of the Olsen government to sell off ETSA, to dud South Australians and to negotiate a totally dud deal for our state, one that has resulted in higher electricity prices and an insecure electricity network.

There is something seriously wrong in our state when we have an electricity network that cannot weather a storm. It is unacceptable that we had thousands and thousands of South Australians being denied power for days and days on end following the storm that occurred the other week. On the one hand, some will say, 'Well, acts of God happen, we are going to see freak weather events, that's part of life'. Certainly, as the climate continues to change, we will see more freak weather events, but that is why it is so vitally important that we have an energy system that is fit for purpose.

The private sector has not been delivering on the energy needs for South Australia because there has not been the appropriate investment in resources in the workforce over time so that we can be prepared for these sort of events. The Greens certainly stand with the union movement in its critique of the approach that has been taken to electricity in our state.

I must say that I am a little perplexed by the position that has been taken by the Labor government because, on the one hand, they purport to support many of the elements of this motion, yet they do not intend to vote for it. With all due respect to the Hon. Russell Wortley, who made a contribution on behalf of the Labor Party, it is not what people say in this chamber, it is what they do with their feet, it is how they vote that is the important test. If the Labor Party is really serious about looking into bringing back ETSA, if the Labor Party is really fulsome in its condemnation of the appalling record of the Olsen government, they will support my motion. The proposition is very simple.

I flag with honourable members that I intend to test that proposition by calling a division on this matter. In summing-up, I also want to read into Hansard an excerpt of a public letter that has been sent from Dale Beasley, the Secretary of SA Unions, to the Hon. Peter Malinauskas MP, and it is a letter that has been published publicly. He says in this letter:

Privatisation of the South Australian electricity system by the Olsen Liberal government has been a boon for foreign owned corporations but has been a disaster for South Australian electricity users.

Clearly it is not in the best interests of South Australians that the natural monopoly of public electricity supply is run by private corporations to create huge profits. This model has seen under investment in maintenance and replacement of electricity distribution infrastructure and a failure to build the renewable energy generation and grid scale energy storage that we require to maintain security of supply and price stability.

We in the Greens agree. The letter goes on to say:

SA Unions respectfully suggests that your Government consider establishing a public trust (ETSA may be a good name) to plan, build and operate electricity generation and storage assets for the benefit of all South Australians.

We agree with those sentiments. Many will say that this cannot be done, that we cannot bring back ETSA, we cannot unscramble the egg. I urge those who make that claim to consider the remarkable success of the Andrews Labor government in Victoria last weekend, a remarkable achievement given the appalling fear and smear campaign that was run by some in the right wing media and the appalling misinformation campaign spread by the Liberal Party in that state.

One of the really exciting elements of the platform of the Labor Party in Victoria is their commitment to revive the State Electricity Commission with a majority share owned by the state. They are wanting to bring back public ownership of their electricity. Why can we not do it here in South Australia?

When the Labor Party came to government here in this state, they promised a commission of inquiring into bringing back public ownership of the trains and trams. The transport minister has announced more recently that that is not necessary because the government is going to progress with it and we welcome that, but why not take the same approach when it comes to electricity? If it is good enough for our public transport network, why not do it for our electricity network? That is why the Greens are testing that proposition with this motion today.

17 November 2022

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: I rise on behalf of the Greens to speak on the Statutes Amendment (National Energy Laws) (Regulatory Sandboxing) Bill. This bill, as part of the national energy law reforms, introduces options to trial emerging innovative technologies and business models in the national energy market.

As I have stated earlier in this place, we are in a climate crisis. For over 100 years, fossil fuels have been providing the energy that we need to stay warm, to keep the lights on and to build industry. According to the National Greenhouse Accounts, energy industries were responsible for 17 per cent of South Australia's greenhouse emissions in 2020. To move towards a cleaner and greener future, we need to evolve our electricity distribution, infrastructure, storage and generation. New technologies are vital to move to a carbon neutral society, and this bill allows for trials for energy technologies in a safe and regulated manner.

While the Greens are broadly supportive of the bill, we do have some concerns regarding clause 33, the innovative trial principles. This section of the bill focuses on developing natural gas services. As this is a national energy law, we are advised that there will be reluctance to move amendments to this element.

I do note, of course, that has happened in the past but, recognising the position of the parties and also the desire to expedite this bill, I will not pursue the amendments that I had previously considered. I will, however, ask the government some questions about that during the committee stage.

After the National Hydrogen Strategy was developed, it became clear that a new definition would be required for gas. According to a policy paper released by energy ministers, a decision was made on 20 August 2021 by the ministers that the national gas regulatory framework should:

…be amended and that the amendments should be expedited to ensure that regulatory barriers do not restrict proposed investments in projects and existing regulatory arrangements and protections continue to work as intended where renewable gases are supplied.

On 28 October this year, energy ministers agreed to amend national gas laws to facilitate this change. The public consultation draft to enact this agreement includes greener fuels such as biogas, biomethane, hydrogen and synthetic methane.

We should not need to wait for a future bill to change the terminology in this proposed legislation. We should be doing it here and now. I will certainly be pursuing the government on that matter. By changing the terminology in this bill, we will move away from natural gas, and we could make provisions for future fuels such as green hydrogen. Creating an environment where we can be agile in our energy and trial new innovations will be beneficial to the transition away from fossil fuels. It is in that spirit that the Greens will be supporting this reform.

17 November 2022

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: I am speaking today on behalf of the Greens on the Statutes Amendment (Natural Energy Laws) (Gas Pipelines) Bill. The bill before us will simplify the regulatory framework for gas pipelines, increase market competition and improve transparency. The Greens' position on gas will be very clear to everybody in this place. We are in a climate emergency and we know that is caused by burning fossil fuels and we need to phase out the use of natural gas.

At this year's COP 27, the UN Secretary-General, Antonio Guterres, provided a stark warning to the world, claiming that we are on a 'highway to climate hell'. Fossil fuels such as natural gas have been a major contributor to climate change. We need to urgently switch to renewable energies such as solar, wind and green hydrogen.

I want to recognise the Malinauskas government's significant investment in green hydrogen in this state—at least this is something that I understand they are planning to act on during this term. Of course, the Greens are supportive of moves towards clean, green renewable fuel, but in this transition to green hydrogen we need to ensure that the pipeline infrastructure is well regulated and transparent.

This bill refers to natural gas, which is something that is of concern to the Greens. Natural gas is a non-renewable fossil fuel comprised of matter that has decomposed over millions of years. The extraction and burning of natural gas is harmful to our environment and our health. In fact, the extraction of natural gas damages our farming land, water table and land stability. It is harmful to our health, and up to 12 per cent of childhood asthma is a result of cooking with so-called natural gas. To address the climate crisis and protect our environment and health, we must urgently put a stop to all new natural gas projects.

We have been advised that there has been agreement by the national energy ministers to bring a future bill to change the wording in legislation to expand the definition to include future fuels such as green hydrogen. While we are disappointed that such a definition has not been included by the government in this bill, we are supportive of that change and look forward to future legislation being introduced in that regard.

The bill before us today provides for a greenfields incentive determination, which will be available to service providers prior to the commissioning of new pipelines. The Greens do not support greenfields gas developments for natural gas, but we do acknowledge that there will need to be new infrastructure to supply and distribute green hydrogen.

The Greens are supporting this bill with the understanding that gas infrastructure is required to support the green hydrogen industry. We also anticipate the changes of wording to ensure that future green gas options are defined in the national energy law rather than simply referring to traditional gas, methane gas, one which we know locks us into serious damage to our environment and indeed our health. With that, I conclude my remarks.

15 November 2022

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: I seek leave to make a brief explanation before addressing a question without notice to the Minister for Regional Development on the topic of regional energy infrastructure and resourcing.

Leave granted.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: As a result of the storms that swept across South Australia over the weekend, a number of regional communities are still without power, I understand, in the Riverland, Yorke Peninsula, Fleurieu Peninsula and the Mid North. On 28 October this year, the Secretary of SA Unions, Mr Dale Beasley, wrote an open letter to the Premier, Mr Peter Malinauskas, that called for the reversal of privatisation of electricity, stating:

Clearly it is not in the best interests of South Australians that the natural monopoly of public electricity supply is run by private corporations to create huge profits. This model has seen under-investment in maintenance and replacement of electricity distribution infrastructure.

My question to the minister therefore is:

1. Does the minister believe that there has been sufficient investment in energy infrastructure and resourcing in the regions?

2. Would the minister support reviving ETSA to ensure that our electricity network meets the needs of our communities, particularly those living in regional South Australia?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN (Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development, Minister for Forest Industries): I thank the honourable member for his question. Of course, electricity services in regional areas are incredibly important and, in the general sense, are part of the need for regional development. However, in terms of the specifics, I will refer the question to my colleague in the other place the Minister for Energy and Mining.

Reply Received 7 February 2023:

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN (Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development, Minister for Forest Industries): The Minister for Energy and Mining has advised:

1. SA Power Networks advises that it spend approximately $300 million per annum in capital and operating costs on maintaining and upgrading the electricity network across all of SA—much of this expenditure is made in regional and remote areas of South Australia.

The Australian Energy Regulator (AER) determines both the operational expenditure and capital expenditure allowances for SA Power Networks for each five year regulatory period. The AER's expenditure assessment criteria require that SA Power Networks is awarded efficient levels of expenditure to maintain ongoing levels of safety and reliability of the electricity network.

Maintenance and operational costs can be higher per customer in rural and regional areas when compared to those in the metropolitan area however customers in these regional areas are protected by a 'postage stamp' approach to the network portion of their electricity bill.

The power outages following the recent storm were widely caused by falling trees, tree limbs and lightning strikes to powerlines and stobie poles, many startling images of this damage have been circulated in the media.

2. The Australian Labor Party opposed the privatisation of ETSA and during its periods in government has had to fix the mess that privatisation caused.

Privatisation did not only affect regional residents of South Australia. All residents and businesses are paying the price of that foolhardy decision.

2 November 2022

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: I move:

That this council—

1. Notes that the commonwealth budget released last week forecast:

(a) a 56 per cent increase in electricity prices over the next 18 months; and

(b) a 44 per cent increase in gas prices over the next 18 months;

2. Notes that Adelaide recorded the highest quarterly rise in CPI in the country with a 2.6 per cent rise for the September 2022 quarter, and an annual rise of 8.4 per cent;

3. Recognises that cost-of-living pressures are continuing to increase for South Australians;

4. Acknowledges that the privatisation of ETSA was a failure of market regulation and contributed to an increase in electricity prices; and

5. Calls on the Malinauskas government to establish a commission of inquiry to examine reviving ETSA and returning South Australia's electricity distribution and transmission network to public ownership.

This motion is calling on the government to establish a commission of inquiry looking into reviving ETSA and returning our electricity service distribution network back into public hands. The reason why the Greens are making this call is because we recognise the significant cost-of-living pressures that South Australians are facing at the moment.

While people are sleeping in tents due to skyrocketing rental prices and low vacancy rates in housing, every day essentials are becoming more and more out of reach. Indeed, just this week we have seen interest rates increase once again, and we have seen predictions around inflation hitting 8 per cent, or more than 8 per cent, here in South Australia.

Last week's federal budget, the first federal Labor budget, forecast a 56 per cent increase in electricity prices over the next 18 months—a 56 per cent increase in electricity prices—and a 44 per cent increase in gas prices over the same period. Such a dramatic increase in energy prices, given the already skyrocketing cost of living, will be devastating for people who are already struggling to stay afloat in our state. Sadly, it is always the most vulnerable who are affected. South Australians should not have to choose between necessary groceries, turning on the heater during this winter period or having appropriate air conditioning when the weather finally warms up.

According to data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, Adelaide recorded the highest quarterly rise in CPI in the country for the September 2022 quarter. Over the last 12 months, the CPI for Adelaide has increased to 8.4 per cent. Over the same period, wages have increased in South Australia by only 2.3 per cent. We have wage stagnation while we have inflation skyrocketing out of control. Where are people going to find the money for extra power bills? The average energy price in South Australia is $1,840 per year. An increase of 56 per cent would equate to more than $1,000 per year for the average household, so in 18 months' time, low-income workers will be spending up to 13 per cent of their income on energy.

The privatisation of ETSA by the Liberal Olsen government delivered higher energy prices—that is a fact—and South Australians have paid dearly for that appalling failure of leadership from that ill-fated Liberal government. Research from the Australia Institute in 2019 found that 40 per cent of South Australians blamed the privatisation of ETSA for power price increases, and they are right because we have seen power prices increase over a long period of time. We know what happens when you sell off key utilities like our electricity network. When you sell off key utilities like electricity, then you let the free market decide, and what we see is utilities working for the interests of shareholders, not the interests of the community.

That is why we are calling for this commission of inquiry to look at bringing back ETSA, re-establishing that as an independent statutory authority that operates for the interests of all South Australians rather than the business of shareholders. The people of South Australia deserve an energy service that is managed by South Australians for South Australians. Over the border, the Victorian Labor government have committed to reviving their State Electricity Commission with a majority share owned by the state should they win the next election. I encourage the Malinauskas government to take inspiration from Daniel Andrews over in Victoria.

I note that yesterday Premier Malinauskas announced a National Energy Crisis Committee of Cabinet to investigate measures to mitigate the impact on the community of price hikes. In the Premier's ministerial statement, he said that South Australia's prices are expected to be lower than in the Eastern States, which rely on coal-fired power stations. That is correct. The SA Productivity Commission's annual report, tabled yesterday, finds that:

…the State's ability to take advantage of these natural advantages has been limited by problems in the local electricity market which reduced the pass through of these lower prices to consumers…this means that South Australia is not currently [at] a competitive advantage due to renewable energy.

We need to fix the electricity market to ensure our power prices stay low so that we can take advantage of our potential position. While the National Energy Crisis Committee of Cabinet is valuable in terms of mitigating the impacts on consumers, bringing back ETSA, returning our electricity network to public hands, would ensure the government can play a vital role in keeping our local energy market on track.

During the last state election, the Labor Party made a commitment to return our trains and trams back into public hands and establish a commission of inquiry to enable that to happen. I know that the Minister for Transport several months ago announced that it was not necessary to progress with that commission of inquiry because he had been working with Keolis Downer to return the train network back into public hands—we welcome that—but that means that the commission of inquiry that was budgeted for by the Labor Party has not been commissioned, and we believe that money should be reallocated to a commission of inquiry looking into bringing back ETSA. That would be a worthy project for this government to undertake.

I welcome statements made to date by the Premier and the Treasurer and other ministers in the Malinauskas government, where they have stated that every option is on the table. I hope this is an option to which they give serious consideration. I hope they seek inspiration from the Daniel Andrews government over in Victoria and look at what is happening in other places around the world, where publicly-owned utilities are able to better serve the needs of the community.

The Greens of course continue to advocate a range of policies that are about not only improving affordability for consumers but also mitigating the impacts of climate change. I note that gas continues to skyrocket out of control; I note that petrol prices continue to skyrocket out of control. The Greens will continue to advocate for alternatives to these. I have a bill before this parliament that would end gas connections to all new homes, and I hope that the Labor Party will give that serious consideration as well.

In the meantime, let's get the commission of inquiry happening, and let's look at how we can bring our electricity network back into public hands so that it operates for the best interests of all South Australians, rather than shareholders of a large corporation. With that, I conclude my remarks.

20 October 2022

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: I also rise in support of the bill on behalf of the Greens. Giving consumers better information regarding their electricity is a key element of the transition towards renewable energy in this state. This bill allows customers the right to transfer their data to compare and switch between products and services. Consumers will need to consent and provide authorisation before their data is shared. This measure is already available in the banking and finance sectors, and by allowing it in the energy sector we can create better options for electricity consumers.

The Productivity Commission, in its 2017 report into data availability and use, found that Australian consumers have little capacity to choose how digital data regarding them is used. The report recommended that consumers be given the right to use their digital data. According to the report, consumer data rights will result in increased market competition, wider service choices and innovation in services.

In 2019, a report by Deloitte investigated consumer data rights in the banking sector. In this survey, they found that trust is key to determining whether or not consumers are likely to share their data. In light of the recent Optus data breach, many consumers will be concerned about the security of their data when it comes to transferring this information. For this reason, the need for security is paramount, but we are satisfied that no data can be shared without the consent of the consumer with respect to this bill.

As we transition away from fossil fuels, giving consumers the right to their data will allow people to have greater choice about where their electricity comes from. The increase in innovation of services that has been forecast is welcome. If electricity providers are forced to transform services to suit customer need, we might see more green options in the energy market, and of course we in the Greens would welcome that.

Nearly 70 per cent of South Australians want full renewable energy by 2030, according to the Australia Institute. While we transition at a state level, we can also give consumers a greater right to their data to allow them to vote with their feet and choose providers that are offering services that are better for our planet. With that, I conclude my remarks.