Source: Australian Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry
John Hill:
I’d like to welcome everyone here today to Pan Pacific. We are Queensland’s only licensed solar recycler, and this is a combination of 20 years of research and development that has gone into being able to make this happen.
We’re pleased today to have the Treasurer Jim Chalmers and the Environment Minister Murray Watt as well as John Grimes from the SEC being here as well.
Without much more to do – we’ll talk about it a bit later – I’d like to introduce John Grimes from the Smart Energy Council.
John Grimes:
John Grimes, I’m the Chief Executive of the Smart Energy Council. Well, folks, you might be able to see this – this is silver. And it’s silver from a single solar panel. This silver was so freshly minted, it was minted here last night. And this today is worth about $55. Solar panels in Australia, if you combined all the solar panels in Australia, you’d get about a thousand tonnes of silver. Today’s prices, about $4.5 billion. Now, it’s not just silver that we take out of solar panels; it’s copper, it’s aluminium, it’s glass, it’s silica.
There’s another kicker, something that Australians are working on. Solar glass is full of a rare earth mineral called antimony. And antimony is one of the things that President Trump is going around the world looking for, and we actually have a lot of it in solar glass. If Australian innovators can crack the code on extracting that rare earth mineral, that alone probably adds about $2 billion to the waste stream opportunity in Australia.
Australians love solar. One in 3 households across the country have solar panels, everywhere from Kununurra to Coogee and everywhere in between. And in the past federal governments have told us don’t buy solar. They’ve been very good at defining the problem. If you buy solar, they said, then you’ll be swimming in this waste stream that you can’t do anything with.
Well, I’d like to say congratulations – congratulations to the federal Environment Minister, to the Treasurer, to the Albanese government, because this government is saying this is not a waste problem; this is an economic opportunity. And they’re absolutely right. That’s why the pilot that’s being announced today is so important.
We estimate that if we get the pilot right, if we design this scheme properly, then a full‑blown scheme will employ more than 2,000 Australians right out of the gate. These are jobs right around the country. Urban mining like you see here in Brisbane today.
We also know that more than 10 million Australians will go to sleep tonight – with solar panels on their roof. And they can sleep a little bit easier knowing that their investment into solar is slashing their cost of living, is slashing their power bills, and now is going to create an economic opportunity even in the waste stream. It’s something we should be proud of. Australia has shown the world how to solar. Well, now we’re going to show the world how to solar recycle.
We’re very proud to be standing alongside the government, the community and industry to say this is massive opportunity. We’re taking smart energy in Australia and we’re making it even smarter. Thank you very much.
Murray Watt:
Well, thanks very much, John. And thanks to the other John, John Hill, who is our host here today, and the other one again – the Mayor of Logan. We’ve got 3 Johns behind us and a couple of other blokes not called John here to announce a very important initiative being funded by the Albanese government – a new solar panel recycling pilot that will revolutionise the reuse of solar panels for the benefit of all Australians into the future.
As John Grimes has just told you, Australians love their solar power. You know, we’ve led the world for a long time when it comes to the uptake of solar panels, and we want to lead the world when it comes to the recycling of those solar panels as well. This initiative, which I’ll say a little bit more about in a moment, is good for the environment, it’s good for jobs, and it’s good for business. So there’s 3 good reasons there for why we should pursue this kind of recycling in a way that no previous Australian Government has ever been prepared to do.
More broadly, the reasons that we’re deciding to get behind this scheme – and I want to thank John Grimes, the Smart Energy Council, and all of the individual companies involved in this advocacy effort – but the 3 reasons we want to pursue this is that if we can increase the recycling of solar panels, we can reduce waste, waste to landfill, we can make better use of those valuable minerals inside solar panels, and we can create good blue collar jobs for Australian communities right around the country.
So there’s really good reasons to pursue this kind of pilot. And I want to thank Jim, the Prime Minister and the rest of our government for getting behind this and providing the funding necessary.
So this pilot, which will commence shortly, is being funded by the government to the tune of $24.7 million over 3 years. And what it’s really about is about working with companies – and there’s people from transportation companies and other companies here today as well right along the supply chain – to work out how can we most efficiently increase the recycling of solar panels and coming up with the best ways, for example, of how to transport solar panels from home to businesses to the recyclers, how to store those panels most efficiently, how to work with the recycling companies to get the best use out of these solar panels to, as I say, reduce landfill, increase reuse of those minerals and to create those good blue collar jobs.
This pilot will be commencing expressions of interest shortly for an administrator of that pilot scheme. And we hope to get moving with it very soon after that. And the intention is to establish around 100 drop‑off points and collection sites for these solar panels that can be then provided to the recycling companies like the one we’re standing here today in Jim Chalmers’ electorate.
So, again, thanks to all of the companies who’ve been involved in this process. We’re really looking forward to working with you. And I know all Australians are excited about the opportunity in not only being world leaders in using solar panels but also in recycling them as well.
I’ll hand over now to Jim Chalmers, the Treasurer, and we’ll have a little bit more to say after that.
Jim Chalmers:
Well, thanks Murray, John and John. I also acknowledge Mayor Jon Raven as well – a real champion for the jobs that are created in places like Crestmead here in our local community. I began the week in Washington DC talking about the vast potential of Australian resources, and I finish the week in Logan City talking about the vast potential of Australian resources. And that’s what this circular economy is all about. It’s the reason why Murray and his predecessor Tanya Plibersek asked me to commission from the Productivity Commission this important work on the circular economy, which we are releasing today at the same time as we visit Pan Pacific here.
I want to acknowledge John for having me back here again. It’s not the first time I’ve been here. There are some friendly faces, familiar faces, in your workforce as well. I acknowledge your workers as well, and I know how important they are to you, John, and all of your partners represented here as well.
This program that we are announcing today is a $24.7 million vote of confidence in Australia’s circular economy. This is all about more jobs and more opportunities in communities like ours and, indeed, right around our economy and right around our country. This means more resources, it means nor renewables, and it means less waste.
It’s an absolutely essential part of the energy transformation that we are creating in our economy. This is how we make sure that Australia has an important role to play at every stage of the supply chain and every stage of the life cycle of these solar panels.
You can see walking around here the potential in the technology that John has talked us through today. This is all about making sure that we do create more renewables and more resources and in the process we will make our economy more productive and more efficient as well.
So this is a really important part of the circular economy that the Albanese Labor government is building in this country. It will become a bigger and bigger part of our industrial base. And we can become a world leader when it comes to recycling solar panels. We know how important that is to the energy transformation. That’s why Murray and I and the whole government are very big believers. The magic that happens here in this workshop in Crestmead is just a small symbol of the work that Australians can do to create more opportunities and more jobs, more renewables, more resources and less waste. And that’s why it’s so important. And that’s why the report that we’re releasing today on the circular economy is so important as well.
Happy to take some questions.
Journalist:
Is it likely that [indistinct] subsidised by the taxpayer or do you anticipate this will actually be viable?
Chalmers:
I’ll throw to Murray and then John Grimes might want to add some points about that as well. But the important role of the pilot is to support the kind of work that John and his colleagues and his workers do here in Crestmead in Logan City. It’s to make sure that we can help create an industry which is going to be absolutely vital to our economic future. And our intention is to support where we can afford to, but our assumption is that over time this will become a self‑sustaining industry because it’s so important.
We’ve been very pleased to see solar take‑up around Australia. We know that there is a real enthusiasm for solar panels, as there should be and increasingly for batteries as well. We need to make sure not just that we can dispose of solar panels effectively but we make the most of it – we recycle it, we reuse it and that’s what this is all about. It will be a self‑sustaining industry in time. But I’ll ask Murray to add to that and maybe John Grimes.
Watt :
Thanks, Jim. Those sorts of issues are exactly what we want to examine in this pilot over the next 3 years, and they will inform future government policy decisions. But if you have a chance to have a look at the Productivity Commission report later today, what you’ll see is that they’ve identified the massive economic opportunities that can come from these sorts of recycling programs into the future rather than them necessarily being a cost to government or to the economy.
Obviously we’ve talked about the opportunity for new jobs, for new businesses, for new investment to occur as a result of this recycling pilot. And that’s good for the economy. It can produce more money for all of us to share in. But also what you’ll see in the Productivity Commission report is that they’ve noted that through pursuing these kind of circular economy practices – more recycling, more reuse, better design of products – we can actually also reduce the cost of products in the first instance. So that there’s real opportunities for over time as this industry grows to be able to reduce the costs to taxpayers, to consumers as well at the same time as generating new income streams as well.
John, did you want to add to that?
Grimes:
When it comes to cost recovery I’m highly optimistic. Innovators like John are Australian solar heroes. They have figured out how to extract these valuable resources, and that process, even at small scale, is pretty much break even. The elements are, though, you’ve got to have the transportation. How do you get a solar panel from Townsville to a recycling plant here, for example? So if we can do this at scale, if we can optimise the transportation piece, then I think this is an exciting opportunity. It’s one of the few revenue streams that we can get from waste. Most other waste is a cost, a cost burden. While the solar waste stream is an economic opportunity, and that’s what this pilot hopefully will uncover.
Journalist:
Sorry, Mr Grimes, how much in terms of either volume or [indistinct] solar panel could you recycle? Is it 100 per cent recycling?
Grimes:
Yes, John Hill.
Hill:
So we’re going for a 99 per cent minimum recovery here. We recover all the silica, all the silver, all the copper and glass. Those products can then go back on and be reused into other products. So our aim here is that all products that leave our site are able to be reused straight away.
Journalist:
[Indistinct] for Australia?
Hill:
Well, we are the only licensed one in Queensland, and I believe currently we possibly are the largest in Australia. We are world leaders in our actual recovery rate. So I believe that most European countries are only extracting 70 to 80 per cent, which is the equivalent of basically just the glass and the [indistinct].
Watt :
Anything else on this topic before we move on to other things? All good? Thanks.
Journalist:
I’ve got some questions –
Watt :
Sure, go for it.
Journalist:
So just on hate speech, are you concerned there could be any kind of unintended consequences related to free speech with the bill in its current form, and do you believe it should be delayed to get it right?
Chalmers:
Well, this bill is all about cracking down on hate speech and anti‑semitism, it’s about toughening our gun laws and it’s about building social cohesion. Now, our political opponents called for us to recall the parliament as soon as possible to pass this kind of legislation only to tell us now that they intend to vote against it when we do.
They said that we were being too slow and now they’re saying that we’re being too fast. I think that there is an urgency to this legislation. It’s very important that we pass this legislation, we crack down on hate speech, we crack down on anti‑semitism, we tighten our gun laws and we build social cohesion in the aftermath of this evil, violent act of anti‑semitic terrorism that we saw at Bondi on the 14th of December.
Now, we are extending the hand of bipartisanship to the Coalition and, as always, they’re balling their fist. This moment calls for more bipartisanship and instead, all they’re offering is more conflict. And the Coalition position on this legislation would be a recipe for more hate speech, more anti‑semitism, more guns and less social cohesion.
We call on the Coalition to put public safety ahead of internal party politics. We know what Sussan Ley is doing here – she’s trying to placate the most extreme elements of her political party. She says that she has prepared alternative legislation, nobody’s seen that legislation. If she’s prepared alternative legislation, let’s see it and let’s engage with them on it in the spirit of bipartisanship which befits this horrific national tragedy.
Now, I think everybody’s suspicion is that in trying to placate the most extreme elements of her party and putting internal politics ahead of public safety, I think the expectation is that Sussan Ley looks like losing her job anyway. And so, if she looks like losing her job anyway, the least she could do is to do the right thing as she heads out the door.
This moment calls for bipartisanship. We’ve extended the hand of bipartisanship. We’re prepared to work with other parties in the parliament to pass these laws urgently because that’s what the situation demands.
Journalist:
So when you say work with other parties, are you talking about the Greens [indistinct]. So what sort of areas of the legislation could be amended to get them on board?
Chalmers:
Well, we understand that the Labor Party doesn’t control the Senate on its own. We don’t have a majority in the Senate. Our preference is typically to work with the other major governing parties to pass legislation in the national interest. But we don’t determine the positions of the other parties in the Senate. We don’t have the numbers on our own in the Senate. We will engage in good faith with people who want to see the right outcome here.
I think it beggars belief that in this moment of Coalition partisan madness that they call on us to hurry up and now they say that it’s happening too fast. They called on us to recall the parliament to pass this kind of legislation only to now tell us that they want to vote against it and I think they’ve lost the plot, frankly. They’ve forgotten what the major purpose of this legislation is, which is to make our community safer, to crack down on anti‑semitism and hate speech, to tighten our gun laws and to build social cohesion. I call on them to remember what this is all about and to stop putting their extreme internal party politics ahead of public safety and the broader public interest.
Journalist:
[Indistinct] splitting [indistinct] omnibus legislation so it’s less complex and you’ve got the 2 separate issues – gun ownership and hate speech in 2 different boxes to get it across the line?
Chalmers:
Well, there are important reasons to consider this as a package and that’s because we know that if you want a comprehensive response to the evil anti‑semitic terrorism that we saw on Bondi Beach not that long ago then that means cracking down on hate speech and anti‑semitism at the same time as we tighten our gun laws. Now, these are all important elements of our response to the horrors of 14 December. And our political opponents seem to call on us to split the bill only to vote against all elements of it anyway.
And I think everybody understands what they’re trying to do here. They’re looking for a partisan outcome. We’re looking for an outcome in the national interest, and that’s the difference.
Journalist:
Treasurer, on another topic, if I may, do you share Michele Bullock’s concern about threats to the independence of the US Federal Reserve?
Chalmers:
First of all, obviously I’m not going to weigh in on a legal process that is underway in the United States or, indeed, the political commentary that surrounds that in the US. But I do want to make a couple of related points.
First of all, central bank independence is absolutely essential. I am a very big supporter of central bank independence. It’s why my Reserve Bank review reforms were all about making our central bank more independent, not less, strengthening our independent Reserve Bank rather than weakening it. It’s why I don’t predict or pre‑empt decisions that are taken independently – correctly – by the Reserve Bank and its board. So central bank independence is really important. That’s the first point.
The second point is I know Jerome Powell. I’ve met with the Chairman of the Federal Reserve on a number of occasions and I’ve participated in a number of meetings with him over the years as well and he strikes me as a very professional, very diligent public servant in the United States. I know him a little bit, I respect him, and that’s been my experience with him.
The third point I make is this: the Governor of the Reserve Bank informed me that she would be putting her name to the statement in support of central bank independence. I told her at the time that I consider that to be appropriate. I think it’s unsurprising that central bank governors from around the world would support central bank independence, and I think it’s entirely appropriate that the Governor of the Reserve Bank of Australia would lend her name to that. I told her that privately and I’m happy to repeat that publicly that I think that was entirely appropriate that Governor Bullock did that.
And so broadly, the specific issues at play here are a matter for the Americans, but the Australian position, the government’s position and the Governor’s position are very clear.
Journalist:
Is there any update on the [indistinct]?
Chalmers:
No, and it’s only just been a few days since Ambassador Rudd announced his intention to step down. I was with Kevin in the United States when the news was made public. I was able to convey to him privately what I would convey now publicly – we have been extraordinarily fortunate to have someone of Kevin’s calibre, intellectual rigour and experience serving Australia in that really important post in Washington DC. From a personal point of view, I’ve been a big beneficiary of his insights from his relationships in the US.
I’ve been working really closely with Kevin, as have a number of Cabinet ministers throughout the 3 years that he’s been our ambassador. He’s been an outstanding Ambassador. We thank him. We wish him well. He’s on to another important role where he will continue to make a really important contribution and I’m grateful that I had the chance to convey our gratitude to him personally as we went from meeting to meeting in Washington DC, including with my counterpart Secretary Bessent.
Journalist:
[Indistinct] warning of [indistinct] with regards to these hate speech laws. Does it need further scrutiny, and what are your thoughts on those [indistinct]?
Chalmers:
Issues that are raised with us in good faith we take seriously and we do our best to take those views into consideration. I think there are important reasons why we’re acting with urgency when it comes to responding to the horrors of 14 December. But in putting this legislation forward, of course we listen to people from different communities. There has been some consultation already. We’re a consultative government. And I don’t believe we have to choose between getting it right or doing it quickly or consulting; those are the essential ingredients of the legislation that we put before the parliament on Monday.
And once again, I say to our political opponents, please put the national interest and public safety before the internal politics of the Coalition parties. This is their chance to do the right thing, and we call on them to do it. Thanks very much.
Journalist:
Can I just ask one more question?
Chalmers:
Of course you can.
Journalist:
Thanks. Just on [indistinct], have you met with [indistinct] over a [indistinct] floods, and what assurances have you received that they’ll be back [indistinct]?
Watt :
Yes, I’ve been meeting and talking with the CEO of the BOM right throughout summer. As you may be aware, we had a new CEO of the BOM start in that position towards the end of last year, so he’s still relatively new in the job. In fact, I met with him again this morning before I came out here about some of the recent issues that have been raised.
On flood gauges, my recollection from the figures is that of the 21 – I think it was – flood gauges that were offline through some of the flooding that happened in north west Queensland earlier this year, only 4 were owned by the BOM. And so that’s why I’ve said in media already this week that I was a little bit surprised to see the comments of the Premier attacking the BOM and the federal government around gauges being offline that are overwhelmingly owned by the state government and local governments.
And that’s why I’ve said, you know, I don’t think it’s helpful when Queenslanders are going through natural disasters for politicians to be engaging in finger pointing and blame game. I’ve held the portfolio of emergency management. When I was the minister – and certainly under following ministers and the Prime Minister and all of our team – we always seek ways to cooperate with other levels of government to get through natural disasters rather than take opportunities to throw pot shots at each other.
So, as I say, I think it’s up to the Premier in particular and some of his supporters to understand the facts here – that the vast majority of gauges are owned by state and local governments. And in addition, our government has invested in our first term over $230 million to buy and upgrade flood gauges around the country that are owned by local and state governments in recognition that they weren’t able to manage those gauges. So, you know, if the state government wants to do something more, they’re welcome to do so. But in the meantime I think it would be better if they work out how to cooperate with other levels of government rather than pick fights.