Energy policy in Queensland and Victoria has been in our sights, with two new submissions responding to government inquiries posted this week.

The proposed reforms represent a valuable opportunity to address energy inequality in Victoria—but that opportunity will be missed unless the specific needs of First Nations peoples are embedded at every stage. 

To fully realise the benefits of proposed changes to the Energy Retail Code of Practice, reforms must be implemented in partnership with First Nations communities.

The Energy Retail Code of Practice sets out the rules retailers must follow and the ongoing protection of gas and electricity customers. 

The Essential Services Commission (ESC) is proposing new rules requiring retailers to: 

• Review and adjust legacy plan prices annually. 
• Switch customers on legacy plans to cheaper options—without needing explicit consent—but with opt-out rights. 
• Ensure any conditional fees or discounts are fair and cost-reflective, even on older contracts. 

The proposed changes present important opportunities to improve energy outcomes for First Nations customers—particularly those experiencing financial hardship, digital exclusion, or energy insecurity. This includes culturally safe training for retailers, data collection to monitor outcomes for First Nations customers, and co-designed outreach and support services. In addition, these reforms present a unique opportunity to address the unique barriers faced by First Nations consumers—including language, literacy, trust in institutions, and access. 

Read our submission

The gaps in the current reforms are detailed below: 

Superficial Engagement with First Nations Consumers 

• Despite acknowledging that First Nations communities are disproportionately affected by digital exclusion, payment method limitations, and systemic hardship, no targeted initiatives or engagement strategies have been proposed. 
• There is no mention of engaging with First Nations consumers in the design or implementation of the reforms. 
• No culturally appropriate consultation models are suggested in the regulatory process. 
• There is no requirement for retailers to collect and report on outcomes for First Nations consumers. This hinders evidence-based reform and masks structural inequality. 

Vulnerability Frameworks Lack Cultural Safety 

• The Payment Difficulty Framework and family violence responses are not culturally informed or trauma-informed for First Nations people. 
• Retailer training and obligations make no mention of cultural competency, local context, or intergenerational trauma. 

Concessions Access Remains Burdensome 

• When promoting the concessions, ensure programs arousing an inclusive definition of payment difficulty which take into consideration barriers related to cultural stigma, institutional distrust, and limited service access, which disproportionately affect First Nations people. 
• Some First Nations consumers may lack access to phones, data or internet, have fluctuating incomes, or face ID documentation barriers, yet the proposed concessions reform assumes self-disclosure and self-navigation of eligibility processes. 
• There is no mention of streamlining or automating concession access for high-risk groups such as First Nations people. 

This is an Opportunity for Equity-Centred Reform 

We urge the Commission to move beyond acknowledgment to active inclusion by working in partnership with First Nations communities. These reforms must reflect the reality that energy is not just an economic issue—but a justice, health, and human rights issue for our communities. We recommend the below steps be undertaken to further protect First Nations consumers: 

Establish a First Nations Consumer Advisory Panel 

• Embed First Nations representation in ESC consultation processes. 
• Partner with First Nations communities to co-design energy hardship programs, communication materials, and outreach campaigns. 

Cultural Competency and Place-Based Training 

• Mandate First Nations cultural competency training for all energy retailer customer service and hardship staff. 
• Create a set of minimum standards for trauma-informed and culturally safe practices. 

Culturally Tailored Assistance and Communication 

• Develop First Nations-specific hardship assistance program. 
• Require retailers to communicate using preferred engagement protocols and media (e.g., local radio, posters at health clinics). 

Concession Access Reform 

• Introduce a universal concession pre-qualification process for Centrelink-connected customers. 
• Pilot automatic concession matching in partnership with Services Australia and Aboriginal Housing Victoria, targeting First Nations tenants and reducing the barriers to concessions. 
• Promote early triggers for support that do not rely on self-identification or written/phone contact alone — such as multiple missed bills, known postcode indicators of disadvantage, or referrals from trusted Aboriginal Organisations ie. their local Aboriginal Community Controlled Organisation. 

Disaggregated Reporting and Accountability 

• Disaggregate hardship and disconnection data by First Nations communities, where possible, to measure reform impact. The ESC could publish annual First Nations energy access and hardship reports to measure improvements. . 
• Track uptake of Utility Relief Grants, disconnections, complaints, and payment plans by First Nations status. 

This review presents a vital opportunity to embed equity in the regulation of essential energy services. We urge the Commission to centre the voices and needs of First Nations people in this process. Doing so is not only consistent with the objectives of the Getting to fair strategy, but essential to a just energy transition for all Victorians. 

The current absence of public reporting of card-operated meter retail performance data represents a significant departure from standard regulatory practice.

It is also inconsistent with frameworks established under National Agreement Targets on Closing the Gap and the First Nations Clean Energy Strategy. 

The need for public retail performance reporting for card-operated meters was previously identified by the Australian Energy Regulator (AER) in 2023. 

Yet, current regulatory arrangements prevent the AER from requiring card-operated meter data reporting by the relevant licensed retailer, Ergon Energy, and limits the Queensland Competition Authority's public reporting powers in relation to card-operated meters, reducing data transparency specifically for First Nations households. 

Reforms that ensure transparency around energy outcomes for all Queensland households are urgently needed to address this gap. 

Read our submission

This submission responds to the Review of the National Energy Retail Law (Queensland) Regulation 2014 discussion paper, released by Queensland Treasury in May 2025.

This submission is made jointly by the First Nations Clean Energy Network and researchers from the Australian National University whose work aims to support First Nations rights and interests in the energy transition. 

This joint submission encourages the Northern Territory Utilities Commission to reconsider the draft Electricity Industry Performance Code decision in light of broad support for reforming remote reporting. Enhancing transparency through these proposed reforms will:

• improve accountability
• help to ensure the EIP Code remains relevant and effective for First Nations interests
• promote more equitable energy outcomes for all households across the Territory.

On 13 May 2025, the Northern Territory Utilities Commission published a draft decision on the 2024 review of the Electricity Industry Performance Code. The draft decision addresses several issues affecting First Nations households in the Territory, including the important matter of electricity retail performance reporting requirements.

The Commission acknowledges in its draft decision that ”the current framework of delivering electricity in communities lacks publicly available performance reporting and service standards” but proposes no immediate remedial action. Instead, the Commission has deferred responsibility, stating that “given responsibility for electricity service provision rests with the Territory Government, any changes to improve performance reporting and transparency should be led by the responsible departments in the first instance”. 

In response to the Northern Territory Utilities Commission's Electricity Performance Code Review, this joint submission was put together from the following organisations: First Nations Clean Energy Network, Aboriginal Housing Northern Territory, ACOSS, AMSANT, Central Land Council, Darwin Community Legal Centre, Energy Consumers Australia, Justice and Equity Centre, NTShelter, NTCOSS, Original Power, and South Australia Financial Counsellors Association.

Read the submission

First Nations organisations and energy affordability advocates have joined together to call on the Utilities Commission of the Northern Territory to exercise its regulatory duty to ensure transparent public reporting for electricity customers on prepayment arrangements.

Our submission to the Australian Energy Regulator sets out the range of reasons why Ergon Energy’s application for a waiver should not be granted, and certainly not without an expiry date. 

As the Australian Energy Regulator notes: This waiver would allow Ergon Energy to continue providing distribution and generation services in non-NEM connected isolated communities, in remote areas of Queensland. These services are provided by 33 isolated power stations, currently predominantly diesel-fired, which support 39 communities. Ergon Energy also has 35 stand-alone networks that provide distribution services for isolated communities. Ergon Energy has provided a complete list of isolated networks in its application. 

Read the submission

The Future Acts regime must clarify that development of renewable energy generation and storage projects on native title land, regardless of what approvals are required (e.g. change to a pastoral lease purpose, etc.), requires an Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA). 

We note the following as additional key issues relating to the Future Acts regime with regard to clean energy projects:

1. The Network considers that there is no principled reason why the onshore and offshore should be treated differently, particularly as the distinction doesn’t make sense where embayments are treated as ‘onshore’, while areas below the low water mark in ocean-facing coasts are treated as offshore. Native title holders are excluded from any input where is no right to negotiate in the offshore (which doesn’t serve the interests of proponents, governments or native title holders). Recommendation: Abolish Subdivision N
2. Extinguishment under Subdivision J relies on ‘operational inconsistency’, whereas court authority has consistently been that extinguishment of native title must be assessed based on inconsistency of rights. If public works are constructed in a reserve that was granted prior to 23 December 1996 and the reserve itself didn’t extinguish native tile, it is contrary to the usual principle of inconsistency of rights if works constructed on the reserve now would extinguish native title. Recommendation: Abolish extinguishment of public works under Subdivision J
3. Section 24KA was only ever intended to apply to essential public works and infrastructure that only restrict/interfere with native title rights while the infrastructure was being built. Developments like large scale transmission lines were never intended to fall under s.24KA, as their large footprint means there are areas where native title rights cannot be exercised while the infrastructure is in place. Large scale infrastructure should require either the right to negotiate or an ILUA. The Network has previously published a discussion paper which included this recommendation (see First Nations and the Clean Energy Transition: Emerging Issues in New Transmission Infrastructure). Recommendation: Section 24KA requires clarification
4. In Tjiwarl, the Full Court held that non-compliance with future act procedural requirements (other than the right to negotiate) would not mean the future act is done invalidly. Where notice and opportunity to comment are such meagre rights already, holding that affording these rights to native title parties by proponents/States is effectively optional seems unfair and unreasonable. Recommendation: Reverse the effect of the Full Federal Court's decision in Tjiwarl

Read our submission here

Remote communities often receive significantly reduced levels of public services compared to the rest of Australia. In addition, often these communities are not connected to Australia’s interconnected electricity systems and are not covered by the same regulatory and policy frameworks designed to protect consumer interests. In particular, remote First Nations communities often receive lower public service levels and consumer protections to those provided to other parts of Australia.

For many remote First Nations communities, increasingly regular temperature and climatic extremes are exacerbating energy insecurity issues.

In addition to the issue of regulatory disparities, other arrangements for the current supply of electricity in remote First Nations communities means that members of these communities are unable to participate in and benefit from Australia’s energy transition - e.g. to access the economic
(and associated cultural, health, education and wellbeing) benefits associated with household solar and battery.

Our submission to the Joint Select Committee on Northern Australia’s Inquiry into Energy, Food and Water Security offers three recommendations, including:

1. Ensure the proper implementation and resourcing of the First Nations Clean Energy Strategy so it can achieve its objectives, including through regular reporting at Energy Ministers’ meetings on the steps taken to implement the First Nations Clean Energy Strategy and progress towards meeting its objectives.
2. Ensure that energy systems in First Nations communities are designed to best meet, at least cost to First Nations community members, the economic and social needs of First Nations community members - and which enables First Nations community members to participate in and benefit from Australia’s energy transition.
3. Ensure that First Nations community members/energy consumers in remote locations are protected by equivalent regulatory and policy frameworks that support and protect energy consumers in more populous parts of Australia.

Read our submission here

While the Draft Renewables Regulatory Framework represents progress in policy development, there remain significant gaps in community engagement, economic participation, landholder protections, industry accountability, and support to ensure First Nations communities have the capability and capacity to participate in and benefit from Queensland’s renewable energy transition.

The transition to clean energy presents an opportunity to rectify historical injustices related to land use, cultural heritage, and economic exclusion. However, without stronger and appropriate regulatory mechanisms and structured First Nations involvement, these inequities may persist. 

Download the submission here

Incorporating First Nations outcomes into the Guarantee of Origin scheme design is essential and necessary for the Australian Government to achieve a range of policy objectives - given the need that these legislative, policy, program and funding schemes establish to ensure that positive First Nations outcomes are tracked, verified and certified in a robust and certain fashion.

Read our submission here