THE HON DAN TEHAN MP
SHADOW MINISTER FOR ENERGY AND EMISSIONS REDUCTION
FEDERAL MEMBER FOR WANNON
AFR ENERGY AND CLIMATE SUMMIT, SYDNEY
22 October 2025
E&OE……………………………………
JENNIFER HEWETT: …… the Coalition is in turmoil over its energy policy. So, where are we on that, and is there any possibility of compromise?
DAN TEHAN: Well, we're working through a process, and when I took this job on, I was determined to make sure that I did it to the best of my ability and that meant ensuring that we bring both the Liberal Party and the National Party together, which is what we've done through our subcommittee, that we've formed, and we're about to go out and begin the process also of going into the community and hearing their views. We've just been over in the West listening to major industry over there. I'll be having discussions with the back bench this week and I'm very determined for us to get up a policy that not only brings us together, but is in the national interests and that's what I'll be seeking to do.
JENNIFER HEWETT: But are you saying it's possible to get a compromise between the Nationals and the Liberals, given that the Nationals seem to be intent on walking away from debt zero by 2050.
DAN TEHAN: Well, Jennifer, when I became Trade Minister, I wanted to do two trade agreements, one with the UK, one with India, and everyone said, fine, it would be easy to do one with the UK and we got that done. I think it's the second best free trade agreement we've ever done. And they said, India, we've tried, we've tried and we're not going to get anywhere, and you're wasting your time. I went over met with the Indian Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal. We sat down, we worked out what we could and couldn't do, how we could manage it within 12 months we delivered an agreement, which no one said we could, so I'm more than happy to give it a go. That's what I'm going to do. And, you know, if everyone comes with the right spirit and right intent, I can't see why we can't do it.
JENNIFER HEWETT: Well, I'm glad you're optimistic. Many people would say that the Indian Government would be a lot easy to deal with that Nationals. So, but also, given that how quickly things are changing, don't you risk, you know, just becoming rather irrelevant to the pace of change that that's going on and what the industry wants and talk of certainty and investment signals and things?
DAN TEHAN: No, not at all, As a matter of fact, what I hear, and I hear it a lot, and especially behind closed doors, is the people are very concerned about what is happening with the transition. They don't think we're getting it right. We're seeing electricity prices continue to rise, even though the government promised that they wouldn't. There's serious concerns about the stability of our grid, there's serious concerns about what the transmission is meaning for industry. You're see communities feel like they've lost all sort of local power and social license when it has when it comes to projects being placed upon them. I do not think at all that we miss not being a key part of getting this right, because we seriously think the Government is getting it wrong. And for Chris, Bowen is a great spruiker, but I can tell you what I hear on the ground shows quite clearly that we are not getting this right, and the Government does not have its settings right.
JENNIFER HEWETT: Well, talking of Chris Bowen, he was here today, of course, and he talked about the fact that this idea of small nuclear reactors and things was just a fantasy, really. And the idea of a nuclear renaissance was ridiculous because they were one, they were far too costly, took too long, and the technology wasn't really there. Do you see the idea of nuclear as a bridge to lower emissions in the longer term?
DAN TEHAN: Well, I’ll say two things. One is, I don't think the Government is serious on reducing emissions, unless they will consider a key part for nuclear and a key role for uranium. I do not think they're serious about reducing global emissions, and I don't think they're serious about reducing emissions here. And the South Australian Premier, two weeks ago said exactly the same thing, that uranium and nuclear will play a key role in how the globe reduces emissions, so I don't think Chris Bowen is serious about reducing emissions if you won't consider a role for nuclear. The second thing I'd say is, and I'd say this with politeness and in a bipartisan way, Chris Bowen should go and meet with Mike Goff, the two IC to Chris Wright, in the US administration, and then he should go to the international Laboratories at Oakridge and Idaho and talk to the professionals there and get a sense as what is happening on the ground. The investment that is going into these projects and it's not government investment, it is private capital, which has all been driven by AI, and then come out and say, no, there's no role for this. The US military is developing micro reactors. They will be ready to go by 2029, 2030, because they want to be able to deploy them. Now, I'm not saying it's the absolute solution for us, but one of the hardest to abate things we've got to deal with is diesel and it comes to mining. So great announcement with regards to rare earths and critical minerals and that agreement with the US overnight. It's fantastic, builds on a lot of work that's being done by previous governments to get to this stage. But seriously, if we've got to go out and mine this stuff, you've got to be able to do it efficiently and effectively and at the at the moment, the only way you can do that is with diesel. Now, surely you should contemplate if there was a way to put micro reactors which you could put there for five or ten years for the life of a mine, maybe longer, and then remove them. Why would you not be prepared to consider that? That, to me, shows something, well, a government that is stuck in the past, not looking at the technology that will drive the future.
JENNIFER HEWETT: Well, I certainly there's a very high cost issue, but I was
DAN TEHAN: But just on that because this is something that is raised. And if you look at it as first in kind, yes, but the CSIRO have just had to make a little amendment to their CostGen report, which shows that they might not have got it right when they used their first in kind figures, and now they're having to adjust that. So as the technology continues to progress, you're going to see the costs come down and all I'm saying is, why the hell wouldn't you consider a technology, which is zero emissions? It just doesn't make sense if you're serious about addressing emissions.
JENNIFER HEWETT: Well, one of the things that struck me was we were talking yesterday about data centres and they were saying that they all have backup power. As I understand, that backup power is diesel, at the moment. So I suppose you would argue that that would be another possible role for micro reactors?
DAN TEHAN: You've just made another key point for me, thank you.
JENNIFER HEWETT: Well, Alright, then I'll make it tougher for you. It's all very well to talk about nuclear in the future and maybe technology will do this and maybe the cost will come down. And it's also very well to talk about the train wreck of the Government's energy policy. I think Sussan Ley used that word today. But what are you going to do in the short term? I mean, obviously, you're saying energy prices are far too far, you know, this is a broken system. Even in your best estimates, you, nuclear is a long way off. What do you plan to do over this decade?
DAN TEHAN: Yeah, well, I think, and you, I've seen it's supported by Queensland state government, in New South Wales state Government, South Australian state government, I think it's also by the Western Australian state government, even Victoria, where we had the energy minister, you know, it was quite surprising the timing, just on the eve of grand final long weekend in Victoria, come out and say, we need a gas reservation policy put in place. Now it's great that she's mentioning the word gas, even though she said it's all got to come from Queensland, and she did it under the disguise of the AFL grand final weekend but think.
JENNIFER HEWETT: That make you feel so cynical.
DAN TEHAN: No, I'm not cynical at all. I am just transparent. What we need to do in the first instance is we've got to step on the gas and not only step on the gas, but we've also got to step on looking at carbon capture and storage. I've just come from Western Australia, I can tell you, they see it there as a potential brand new industry for us. And not only do they see it's going to be absolutely critical for how we reduce emissions here domestically, but there are enormous opportunities for us to help Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and others to be able to reduce their emissions as well. You've had serious reports from Princeton University, University of Melbourne University in Queensland, saying the carbon capture storage has to be a serious part of any efforts to get to next zero. Yet we will not put any revenue, we will put no resources behind, building what could be a brand new nation building opportunity for us, and once again, why? We all know that gas is going to be a key component, not only of addressing emissions reduction, but making sure that manufacturing can survive in this nation. So we should be investing in carbon capture and storage.
JENNIFER HEWETT: So in terms of gas and you want more gas, alright, everybody says, well, now here, it's a very important part of the transition. et cetera. What do you do to make both gas generation and gas mining, or sorry, gas development, feels more we don't seem to be doing that at all. A lot of that has to do with the states, surely.
DAN TEHAN: Well, you've got to work with the states and what we're hearing from the states is that they all know and understand that gas is going to be absolutely essential. So we've got to work with them to incentivize it. You've got to do things like put gas in the capacity investments game. Why isn't it in the capacity investments scheme? Simple things like that will make a meaningful, meaningful difference immediately, and yet we're not prepared to look at that. And I don't understand why, ideologically, when everyone is saying, even you've got groups coming out who are, you know, 100% renewables approach, saying we need gas, if we won't even put it in the capacity investment scheme. And my hope is that even though the way that the gas review, has been put in place, it's not really meant to talk about gas in the capacity investment scheme. My hope is there will be recommendations along those lines because I know that that's what most common sense people think we should do.
JENNIFER HEWETT: OK. I just remembered that I meant to ask you something about back to net zero on 2050. It's your personal view, isn't it, that you should keep that commitment?
DAN TEHAN: Well, I supported the move when we adopted net zero. When I was in the Morrison Cabinet. Now I have a review, which I'm obviously undertaking. I've got to come up with a position, but no, I haven't changed the view, that I had at the time when we made that decision in the Morrison government.
JENNIFER HEWETT: There was some suggestion that the Liberals could put it out to 2060. Is that feasible?
DAN TEHAN: Look, I get a lot of advice and have been getting a lot of advice over the last six months and some of it is very welcome and very well meaning, some of it comes via anonymous sources through newspapers. I take it all on board, and I'm just trying to make sure that in the end, we will come up with a policy that's in the national interest.
JENNIFER HEWETT: OK. But what we do have, though, is renewables, wind, and solar, wind certainly offshore, not offshore wind anymore, but certainly a lot of solar and wind are going on. Do you think that that should be stopped? Do you I mean, you happy to support that? Great expansion?
DAN TEHAN: I've always believed renewables in the right place should be part of about energy mix and if you go to my electorate, you'll see that we have more wind I think than any other electorate in Australia. But the trouble is now, what we're seeing is that there isn't the right approach being taken. We're starting to see the renewables rollout, going to areas where they clearly shouldn't go. We're starting to see projects signed off under the Capacity Investment Scheme when they haven't even got environmental approvals. We've seen that study come out of Queensland from that group, which shows that large areas where there is unique biodiversity in Australia now is being impacted. So renewables in the right place, absolutely, but just renewables being rolled out and no care being taken to what the impact will be on prime IM agricultural and and to biodiversity is not the approach that I can tell you people in my community or across regional and rural Australia want to see.
JENNIFER HEWETT: So you think the past should slow down rather than speed up?
DAN TEHAN:But what I'm saying is that there has to be proper consideration given to where these projects are going and it is quite, quite alarming, quite, quite alarming, that the Department or the Minister have sought to map or have any sort of plan with regards to this. It's taken amateurs to put together this research, and its research which is backed once again by Princton University, University of Queensland, University of Melbourne, around the scale of what is being proposed. A landmass 1.7 times the size of Tasmania is the footprint of this renewables rollout and the impact that that's going to have on prime agricultural land and our diversity has to be taken into account, and it's not at the moment, and the minister should make his department properly map it and make sure that these renewables projects are going in the right place.
JENNIFER HEWETT: But even if you say there's not about and going in the right place, we're going to need to expand a lot, given the demand for energy, right? So are you saying that that expansion is a reasonable proposition? You might decide where to put them, but that they should be a lot more wind farms and solar farms.
DAN TEHAN: Well, I don't want to see is destroy the environment, or destroy prime agricultural land in trying to save the planet, that just doesn't make sense. Everything you do should be properly planned and you should have a proper balance with what you're trying to do. And at the moment, we're not seeing this, what we've seen as a minister who is a spruiker. He's not designing proper policy. He's not there saying, OK, this is the best way for Australia to get to where we need to. He's not anything more than a spruiker.
JENNIFER HEWETT: Alright, well, we're going to talk about, I think Sussan Ley said, for example, the subsidies for EVs, are just a waste of money and it's not good idea. What about the subsidies for solar panels and batteries for households? Should they be stopped?
DAN TEHAN: Well, we're looking at all these at the moment and going through a process and we'll have more to say on all of this, when we come out and say, OK, this is the approach that we are going to take. So we're looking at all this at the moment, and we're looking at, for instance, the $10, $11 billion dollars the government have allocated for green hydrogen. Now, I think most people now realise that this idea of us becoming a green hydrogen superpower, we're not going to see that till 2040, 2045, 2050 at best. And there's still $10 billion that has been allocated towards that. Is there a better way for us to to allocate that funding? These are all the things that we're working through at the moment.
JENNIFER HEWETT: So we were having Alistair on discussion earlier in the previous panel talking about transmission lines and the world of opposition to that, obviously, particularly in Western Victoria, but also in other places. What do you think about them I mean, surely there's a need for those big transmission lines if we're going to go through this energy transition?
DAN TEHAN: Well, whether there is a need for the size and scale of the transmission line rollout is something that needs to be seriously and objectively looked at because is there a better ways for us to do that? For instance, a lot of the soundings that I've taken, especially with regards to solar, says that there is huge opportunities for us to be put in solar onto commercial buildings. So, rather than us having to deliver solar projects, which require huge transmission line increases, there is a capability for us immediately now with the right incentives to be able to put solar on commercial rooftops in Sydney and Melbourne, which means you don't have the cost that you have to pay to put these transmission lines in place. So there are a number of ways that we can do this and I can tell you transmission line cost is one of the things that is driving people's bills up and not only that, it's driving the price up of getting energy for industry, and those industries are coming to government and they're knocking on their door and more and more saying, you have to do something to help us when it comes to energy costs, because I'd say to everyone in this room, you know, there's a bit of research tonight, go home and have a look at where Australian energy costs are at the moment compared to those internationally. We are not competitive and we have to make sure that we're remaining internationally competitive when it comes to our energy costs.
JENNIFER HEWETT: Well, I guess we'll have to wait a bit longer. How much longer to find out what your answer to all this is as opposed to complaining about what the Government's policy?
DAN TEHAN: Oh, one of the things that an Opposition has to do, and I'm going to be continuing to do it is hold the government to account. We've got two really, really important roles. We've got to hold the Government to account, and I can tell you, you know, one area where the media in particular should be looking at is the Capacity Investment Scheme and the lack of transparency around that at the moment. So we will continue to make the case with regards to holding the Government to account, and when it comes to putting our policy in place, I've said that, you know, it could take six to 12 months. I want to make sure I get it right, and I want to take the time to get it right.
JENNIFER HEWETT: So early next year?
DAN TEHAN: Potentially, early next year. That's a possibility.
JENNIFER HEWETT: OK, well, certainly in time for next conference.
DAN TEHAN: Yeah, definitely in time for your next one.
JENNIFER HEWETT: Alright, well, I would like you to join me and thanking the Opposition spokesperson. Thank you so much.
