We need to move to 100% renewables

Today in Parliament, Abigail spoke in support of the New England Renewable Energy Zone and advocated for a publicly-owned renewables transition that is fully transparent and free from fossil fuel money and political interference.

Abigail said:

The Greens are unequivocal: We need to move to 100 per cent renewables, and the New England Renewable Energy Zone is a critical part of New South Wales fulfilling its climate obligations. The Greens support public investment and public ownership of generation, transmission and distribution networks to enable 100 per cent renewable energy. We believe public ownership is the best way to achieve our climate goals, not only because it makes economic sense but also because the strength of public support for a renewable energy transition will ensure that those projects proceed smoothly and swiftly and with sufficient support for investment. That public support is precious. Every day, the anti-democratic forces of billionaire dark money and corporate lobbying seek to distort facts and present a concerted disinformation campaign to undermine the renewable energy transition.

Those billionaires and multinational fossil fuel companies do not want renewable energy because they enrich themselves by maintaining a near monopoly control of fossil fuels and rake in millions of dollars in pure profit every day from energy bill price gouging. Wind and solar can level our electricity landscape, breaking the billionaire bottleneck with free and abundant energy sources. We know that fossil fuel power shadow money is flowing daily into right-wing groups like Advance, and parent groups like the Atlas Foundation, which have the democratic rights and interests of the public in their sights. In that context, it is essential to preserve the public mandate for renewables. Our position is in line with the scientific understandings of the reality of climate change and the predictable consequences of unabated carbon emissions.

We know we need to make the investment to replace coal, but projects like that only succeed with genuine social licence, which is why The Greens support the motion under Standing Order 52. I do not profess to be the arbiter of the most appropriate route for the transmission line; I simply expect the experts to have made the right decision. Members of the community reported feeling surprised and blindsided by the reasons EnergyCo gave to justify the decision to shift the corridor from the path that had previously been determined. The reasons that EnergyCo gave sound technical and practical: The initial corridor crossed steep terrain that was difficult to access, and the revised route would allow for safer construction, less earthworks, fewer trucks on local roads, and reduced clearing of vegetation. It also claims to resolve concerns about transmission lines interfering with aerial firefighting operations around Chaffey Dam and Lake Glenbawn.

That all sounds good, but let us make sure the documentation backs it up. If it does not, we deserve to know. We need to be confident that decisions of such gravity are not suffering from political influence and that certain landholders are not being privileged at the expense of others. We will not do anything to get in the way of the renewables transition progressing apace. Big decisions and changes demand transparency in order to preserve their legitimacy.

Read the debate in Hansard here.

18 March 2026

Join 58,108 other supporters in taking action