Introduction: Where We Are, Who We Are, and Where We’ve Come From
I’d like to begin by acknowledging the Ngarluma people as the Traditional Owners of the land on which we meet today.
The word Karratha is commonly understood to mean “good country” or “soft earth” in Ngarluma — and that feels right.
This place has always been more than a dot on the map. It’s a proving ground — a place where WA’s industrial and economic story has taken shape.
It’s great to be back at the Pilbara Summit.
Over the years, I’ve come here in many guises: working with Horizon Power, DBP and ATCO — all with deep roots in this region; as a backbencher on the Chamber of Minerals and Energy’s famous Pilbara Tour; as a Parliamentary Secretary representing Ministers and the Premier; and now, simply as someone who wants to get things done.
These days, I wear two hats:
One with the Superpower Institute, founded by Prof Ross Garnaut and Prof Rod Sims, helping position Australia as a global leader in clean energy and green industrial exports.The other through my own consultancy, working with companies tackling the real-world challenges of energy transition — delivery, regulation, infrastructure, investment.
My work is 100% focused on transition. Not just policy — execution. So it’s a privilege to be in a room with so many others facing those same challenges.
It’s especially good to share this stage with Prof Gordon Flake — who, through the Perth USAsia Centre and beyond, has done more than just about anyone in the state to foster thoughtful, honest, and sometimes uncomfortable conversations about WA’s role in the world.
Gordon understands the value of safe spaces for dangerous ideas. And that’s what I hope today’s session can be.
I wasn’t invited here to toe the line — I was asked to offer a provocation or two. And I said I’d be delighted to — now that I’m a free woman.
This is the first in what I hope will be a series of contributions on some of the more difficult, consequential questions I have in economic policy.
And I can’t think of a better place to start than the Pilbara — a region that has shaped so much of my thinking, both in politics and since leaving it.
Because this is where the rubber hits the road.
We know what needs to happen. We’ve written the strategies. We’ve had the roundtables. But as I said in my valedictory speech: we have five years to grasp this opportunity before it slips through our fingers. And one of them has almost already gone.
Today, with aligned governments, credible projects, and deep industrial capability — the constraint isn’t imagination. It isn’t ambition.
The constraint is capital.
And we won’t unlock it with glossy brochures.
We have to earn it — through delivery capability, infrastructure coordination, credible policy, and real partnerships.
Having worked in industry, in government, and now directly with those trying to build real projects on the ground, I’ve come to believe that WA has its own very particular reasons to act.
Reasons that are strategic, economic, and deeply local.
And nowhere are they more immediate — or more relevant — than right here in the Pilbara, Australia’s most fossil-fuel-dependent economic region.
If we meet those challenges with clarity and conviction, we won’t just decarbonise. We’ll unlock the capital we need — and take the lead.
Introducing the WA Trilemma
Three urgent, interlocking local challenges compel us to act:
- Energy Security — safeguarding our independence and resilience.
- Industrial Competitiveness — protecting and evolving the industries that built WA.
- Institutional Capability — reclaiming our muscle memory for bold, nation-building delivery.
It’s about more than meeting climate targets.
It’s about protecting our home, securing our livelihoods, and ensuring the legacy we pass on is one of strength, innovation, and shared prosperity.
1. Energy Security: Becoming Self-Reliant in a Changing World
No jurisdiction in Australia understands energy security more deeply than Western Australia. It’s been central to our identity, our economy, and our strategic strength.
The North West Shelf was a nation-shaping project. The gas that flowed from the North West didn’t just power homes — it powered industry. It underpinned fertiliser, alumina and manufacturing plants, and created thousands of jobs across the Pilbara and the South West.
Through our domestic gas policy, we ensured WA’s economy benefited directly from our natural endowments — with secure, stable supply that kept local industries running even when global markets turned volatile.
That was true foresight. And it worked.
But the world has changed.
Global energy markets are less stable. Geopolitical tensions are rising. Gas — once our secure foundation — is now exposed to price shocks and volatility we can’t control.
And since the closure of the BP refinery in Kwinana, we’ve become increasingly reliant on imported liquid fuels.
That’s why WA must again lead on energy security — not by returning to the past, but by building a new, diversified foundation based on renewables.
We will need every available electron and molecule to sustain and grow our economy as we transition to net zero.
That means scaling up wind, solar, batteries, and green fuels — fast. These aren’t just clean. They’re sovereign. They reduce our exposure to global volatility. They build resilience.
Gas will continue to play an essential role — particularly for industries that can’t easily electrify, and as a firming fuel to support renewables. But it’s a finite resource — and its role will become increasingly niche.
We must be strategic: preserving supply for hard-to-abate sectors, and treating gas as a bridge — not a crutch.
And if we believe gas has a vital role in transition, then accelerating renewables becomes even more important — because it frees gas up for its highest-value uses.
But this isn’t just about energy. It’s about sovereign capability — to produce fertiliser, hydrogen, steel, alumina, ammonia, and processed critical minerals with a much lower carbon footprint.
Our ability to manufacture with clean, local energy will determine whether Australia remains an industrial nation in the 21st century.
COVID reminded us what happens when global supply chains fail. The lesson applies equally to energy, industrial inputs, and strategic capability.
So yes — achieving energy security today means more than it did in the past.
It means delivering new projects, fast.
It means using gas strategically.
It means increasing renewable supply with urgency and discipline.
And it means building the sovereign capability and resilience we’ll need in the systems that underpin our future economy.
If WA builds that platform, we won’t just be more resilient. We’ll be more competitive.
So what are the dangerous ideas we should be willing to consider when it comes to securing our energy future?
Can we move beyond treating renewable energy expansion as simply a utility issue — and start seeing it as a matter of state sovereign security, trade strategy, and industrial survival?
And could we go further — Can we build on the legacy of our natural gas export industry and again position WA as a trusted supplier of stable, sovereign, cleaner energy in an increasingly volatile world?
2. Industrial Competitiveness: Protecting and Evolving our Economic Engine
Western Australia’s prosperity has been forged by our industrial base — and it continues to underpin the livelihoods of tens of thousands of people.
Our iron ore industry is the cornerstone of that foundation.
It’s not just a headline figure on a balance sheet — it’s jobs in the Pilbara, schools in Perth, hospitals in regional towns, and infrastructure across the State.
Nearly one billion tonnes of ore pass through our Pilbara ports every year, and the royalties and revenues that flow from that activity have supported generations of Western Australians.
The same is true of the Kwinana Industrial Area — a critical precinct that houses some of our most important chemical, refining, and manufacturing facilities.
Together, these hubs represent a vast ecosystem of employment, skills, engineering capability, and economic activity.
They are too important to ignore, and too valuable to lose.
Decarbonisation is not just about creating new industries — though that will be essential.
It is also, urgently, about protecting what we already have.
Because if we don’t act, we will lose ground.
Not overnight — but gradually, inexorably.
The global economy is shifting. Buyers are demanding lower-emissions inputs. Trade partners are introducing carbon border adjustment mechanisms. Investment capital is increasingly screened for climate risk.
Competitor jurisdictions — from Brazil and Oman to South Africa — are investing in low-carbon production and marketing it as a strategic advantage.
Our iron ore, by contrast, is carbon-intensive to process. Without action, we risk becoming less competitive, less attractive — and eventually, less relevant.
At the Superpower Institute, we’ve released a Green Iron Plan for Australia — a practical, regionally tailored roadmap to help this country become a global producer of green iron: a vital product for a decarbonised world.
It calls for early production, enabling infrastructure, scaled hydrogen supply, and tighter coordination across government and industry. And it’s clear: we need to act now if we want to compete.
Unfortunately, our research suggests the news isn’t all that good for the Pilbara in the longer term. While it remains central to Australia’s iron ore exports, the report identifies serious risks to future competitiveness.
Lower ore quality is fine in a carbon-intensive steelmaking world. But right now the economics of using Pilbara ore in existing low carbon pathways is challenging.
Without coordinated investment in clean energy, common user infrastructure, innovation and ore processing or blending solutions, the Pilbara risks being outpaced by competitors with better access to low-carbon energy and ore.
In contrast, regions like the Eyre Peninsula — with magnetite and strong renewables — may be better positioned to seize early opportunities.
That doesn’t mean the Pilbara can’t lead. But it must move swiftly to upgrade its industrial base and support the decarbonisation of existing operations.
Encouragingly, we’re beginning to see the kind of innovation required to stay competitive. In the Pilbara, Fortescue is developing a novel, low-emissions steelmaking technology designed to eliminate the need for coking coal.
In Kwinana, BHP and Rio Tinto are partnering with BlueScope, Woodside, and Mitsui to deliver a large-scale electric smelting furnace pilot, using Pilbara ore and green DRI to produce low-carbon iron.
With significant State and Federal backing, this project could prove WA’s ability to export value-added, low-emissions iron — and keep jobs at home.
But is there more we could be doing?
Are there dangerous ideas we could entertain?
Should we look at processing -- or blending Pilbara ores with magnetite -- in renewable-rich regions like the Mid West, creating a lower-emissions product that bridges today’s exports with tomorrow’s green demand?
Could we examine how royalty relief for iron ore used in low-carbon downstream processing might reward value-add and environmental leadership?
Could we explore carefully designed, price-based mechanisms that align with global carbon signals — not to impose extra burden, but to unlock capital, reduce trade friction, and show we understand the emerging rules of the game?
Signals that help direct investment into the most economically efficient abatement pathways — and let the market decide the best way forward. Because whether we like it or not, these signals are already shaping global markets. And we need to be in the game — not on the sidelines.
Here’s an even more dangerous idea:
Could a carbon signal — sensitively structured — help us get clearer on the role of gas, and on the technologies we’ll need to decarbonise gas and other vital industrial processes?
Because if we believe gas has a role in the transition, then accelerating renewables becomes even more important — not just for emissions, but to free gas up for its highest-value, most productive uses. This is the kind of territory a sitting politician often fears to tread. Luckily for me, I’m not one anymore.
This region — which has contributed so much to our prosperity — faces significant risk. We simply must act to protect and evolve our industrial engine, to preserve jobs, value, and national capability. And we must recognise this is a global contest.
If we fail to support industry to decarbonise here, we risk losing production — and jobs — to countries with weaker standards, lower transparency, and fewer community safeguards.
That’s not climate leadership. That’s carbon leakage. And we must avoid it.
We’re not starting from scratch. We have world-class operators, deep expertise, and a track record of solving hard problems at scale. What we need now is coordination, support — and courage.
This is about jobs, families and the economy we hand over to our children. Let’s make sure it’s not one that withered on the vine — but one that evolved, endured, and thrived.
3. Institutional Capability: Reclaiming Our Nation-Building Muscle Memory
The final pillar of the WA Trilemma — and perhaps the most personal — is this:
We decarbonise not just because it’s good for the planet.We do it because it’s what we do.Or at least — it’s what we used to do.
There was a time when Western Australia led the nation in ambition, scale, and delivery. When bold, transformative projects weren’t the exception — they were the expectation.
The Pilbara’s iron ore industry was built by risk-takers. The North West Shelf was unlocked by bold public-private partnerships.
We didn’t spend a decade consulting. We rolled up our sleeves, figured out what was needed, and got it done. That decisiveness — that clarity of purpose — is in our economic DNA.
We like to think of ourselves as the most entrepreneurial state in the country. But if we’re honest, are we still?
Because entrepreneurship isn’t just about startups and innovation hubs. It’s about building things. Big things. Things that matter.
That “muscle memory” of nation-building — the deep capability to plan, invest, and deliver major infrastructure — still lives here. But it’s underused. We’ve let it atrophy under layers of fragmentation, duplication, and institutional hesitation.
Projects get caught in process loops. We’ve become excellent at asking questions — and hesitant to make decisions.
Yes, we must uphold high environmental and cultural standards. That’s non-negotiable. It’s what makes our projects not just possible, but enduring. It also makes them investable. The global sustainable finance community is watching — and the jurisdictions that can demonstrate integrity, inclusivity, and long-term value will be the ones that attract capital.
But we also need to move with speed, coordination, and confidence. Because if we don’t, others will.
The good news is, under the Cook government there are signs of change.
The establishment of Powering WA shows that the State recognises the scale of the challenge, but I would observe that the task WA faces is far greater than the energy portfolio. The green tape unit and creation of a Coordinator General role, inspired by successful models in Queensland, is a positive step — even if that role’s authority still needs to mature.
The release of the Strategic Industrial Areas policy is another important shift. And the recent reconfiguration of the public service signals a willingness to experiment with more agile, responsive institutions. These are encouraging moves. But they’re just the start.
Because this isn’t about fixing single policies. It’s about remembering who we are — and what we’ve already proven we can do.
We’ve built regions, industries and economies from the ground up. We’ve delivered ports, pipelines, power systems, and export corridors — fast. That’s the legacy we stand on — and the mindset we need now.
Decarbonisation isn’t a burden. It’s our next great act of economic leadership.
We’ve done it before. And if we get this right, we can do it again.
To get there, we need to solve for three things
- Energy security.
- Industrial competitiveness.
- Institutional capability.
That’s the WA Trilemma.
And we won’t solve any part of it without capital — capital that’s willing to back shared infrastructure, sustain existing industries through transition, and build the systems the future demands.
Because this isn’t just about creating something new.
It’s about protecting what we already have — and positioning it to thrive in a decarbonising global economy.
And unlocking that kind of capital means asking some uncomfortable — maybe even dangerous — questions:
About ownership.About delivery.About risk.And about the role of the state.
Which brings me to perhaps the biggest challenge — and our greatest opportunity:
How we mobilise capital at the scale and speed the transition demands.
Mobilising Capital for the Transition
If Western Australia is to meet the scale and pace of the energy transition, we must confront our binding constraint: capital.
Not ambition.Not imagination.
Capital — driven by the institutional frameworks, investment models, and delivery partnerships that turn vision into action.
For decades, WA governments helped build this State’s economic foundations through bold public–private partnerships. Infrastructure, ports, energy systems, industrial precincts — these weren’t the accidental outcomes of market forces. They were delivered through decisive action, backed by governments of both colours who were confident, capable, and willing to lead.
Premier Roger Cook has signalled a bold new agenda for economic diversification and decarbonisation — and that’s very welcome. But we risk holding it back if we stay stuck in an outdated debate: one rooted in a legacy model of the energy system, and a set of ideological positions that no longer serve us — and which stifle the capital we now need.
We should be seeing more progress — especially in the South West. Major renewable and infrastructure proponents are ready to go. They have the capital. They have the projects. They’re willing to fund, build, own and operate new transmission to serve emerging industrial hubs in the Mid West, and deliver lower carbon electricity to major users in the south west.
And the reality is — WA is ready for this.
- We have a strong, independent regulator.
- A clear market framework.
- A capable system and market operator.
- And a capital market that’s ready — even hungry — to invest in clean infrastructure.
But they can’t proceed because we’re still trapped in a debate that conflates private participation with the spectre of “privatisation.”
As a result, critical projects stall. Investment confidence weakens. Capital freezes. And we miss the chance to decarbonise — and compete.
It’s frustrating. Especially because I’ve seen this before. In 2017, we launched the WA Parliament’s microgrids inquiry for this very reason: legacy debates were holding back reform.
It was just after an election fought, in part, on privatisation. The politics were raw. But the bipartisan committee made a deliberate choice: we didn’t rehash those arguments. We recognised they belonged to another era — and were blocking the future.
So we asked the real questions: What do the physics, the engineering, and the economics tell us about how best to deliver secure, reliable, affordable energy?
And the answer was clear: For traditional parts of the system — especially the networks that serve households and small businesses — public ownership and vertical visibility along the energy chain are essential. They deliver equity, resilience and long-term value. That conclusion still holds. I stand by it.
I want to labour this point, to ensure my remarks are not taken out of context: Western Power must continue to own and operate its existing assets, in public hands. I was a Hillbilly for 20 years and the Hills catch fire every summer. There’s no way I want anyone other than a public utility running the poles and wires that keep those communities safe.
But let’s be clear: that’s not what we’re talking about now.
Our new infrastructure needs aren’t about “mum and dad” supply. They’re high-voltage, large-scale, industrial systems — powering green iron, hydrogen, ammonia, battery manufacturing, and critical minerals processing. They’re strategic. They’re complex. They fall outside the frameworks built for a different era.
They’re so huge in scale that existing networks will connect to them — not the other way around.
And that’s why the Pilbara matters so much. It’s where industrial demand, infrastructure, and opportunity converge. It’s under pressure to decarbonise — and perfectly placed to lead.
We’re already seeing new financial models, new partnerships, and new delivery frameworks emerge — ones that blur the old lines between public and private, policy and investment.
Greenlink is a prime example: an open-access transmission backbone to unlock gigawatts of renewable energy. It’s multi-user and designed to attract private capital and operation. It blends public facilitation with private delivery — and puts shared infrastructure at the centre of industrial strategy.
Let’s be honest: coordination like this isn’t easy. The Pilbara isn’t exactly famous for its love of common-user infrastructure. It’s a region where collaboration has often taken a back seat to competition — where access has historically been a point of conflict, not convergence.
That’s what makes Greenlink so important. Because if we can forge new investment and delivery models here — in one of the most commercially complex regions in the country — we can do it anywhere. And we simply must.
And it’s not just the model — it’s the capital stack. The Federal Government is willing to back it — using catalytic funding structures that harness the Commonwealth’s financial strength to crowd in private investment. Other States are doing this too — leveraging their balance sheets to unlock clean infrastructure.
If the private sector is prepared to fund, build, own and operate major industrial energy assets — let it.
And if the State can use its capital to help more marginal projects along — we should be open to that too.
This is the kind of flexible, collaborative financing approach we now need — not rigid models from the past, but new mechanisms that align with our decarbonisation and diversification goals.
New models that allow the public service and government trading enterprises to focus on their core business: Planning. Approvals. Regulation. Land readiness. Their existing customer bases.
Not being stretched to design, fund and deliver first-of-a-kind infrastructure. The existing job is big enough.
Running the SWIS, delivering water, overseeing public utilities, serving remote communities — these are already complex, mission-critical tasks. Let’s not dilute that capability by expecting them to build green energy mega-projects from scratch.
We also don’t need to burden the State’s balance sheet — or WA taxpayers — when the private sector is ready and able to step up.
We need institutional arrangements that combine the best of both worlds: Public oversight and strategic direction, with private capital, delivery experience, and speed.
This is Collaborative Governance — where each party plays to its strengths, and the system is designed for execution, not inertia. We need to stop obsessing over who should own it — and start asking how we get it built.
Because we don’t have time to reinvent the wheel, duplicate effort, or let institutional overload slow us down — not when the capital is ready, and the opportunity is slipping through our fingers.
So what are the dangerous ideas we need to entertain?
- Are we ready for a more mature, more sophisticated conversation in WA — not just about the respective roles of public and private capital, but about roles in delivery?
- Can we resist the temptation to resurrect the “privatisation” bogeyman every time private ownership or delivery is proposed — especially when we’re not talking about existing core public assets, but about new, large-scale industrial infrastructure that industry is ready and willing to deliver?
- Could we go further — and embed third-party, open-access infrastructure as standard practice, with ownership models that attract private capital and enable shared access — not just for transmission, but for other industrial enablers? Not just in the Pilbara — but across the State.
- And are we prepared to build political consensus and institutional frameworks that actually enable collaboration — not just within parliament, but between government and industry — where agencies are supported to focus on facilitation and coordination, not ownership?
And where industry plays its part too — by embracing new models, investing in shared systems, and helping to create the space for government to lead in new ways?
These aren’t radical ideas. They’re what the rest of the world is already doing.
WA has the capability.We have the credibility.We have the capital.
What we need now is the courage to evolve.
Let’s take what we’re learning in the Pilbara — and apply it across the State.Let’s stop asking who should own it — and start asking how we get it built. Let’s focus on delivery.
Because that’s how we lead.
A Call to Action: Bold Leadership, Integrated Coordination, and Relentless Focus on Delivery
We began this conversation with the WA Trilemma — the challenge of securing our energy future, protecting our industrial base, and rebuilding our institutional muscle memory. These aren’t just policy goals. They are the foundations of a stronger, more sovereign Western Australia. But none of them can be solved in isolation — and none will be solved with business-as-usual thinking.
To meet this moment, we need a new kind of leadership. Not just in government — across the board. Leadership that’s comfortable with complexity. Prepared to test ideas, not wedded to ideology. Unafraid of reform. And laser-focused on delivery.
We need government that partners with purpose.
Industry that leans into coordination, shared infrastructure, and innovative public policy.
And communities that are brought along — not left behind.
That means doing things differently.
It means embracing partnerships like Greenlink — and replicating that mindset across the State. It means welcoming private capital — where it helps us move faster and scale bigger. It means backing our existing industries to decarbonise — while building the new ones that will define our future.
And yes — it means making space for some dangerous ideas.
Some hard questions. But the right ones.
Because if we’re serious about solving the trilemma then we need to act with urgency, discipline, and a little daring.
This is the kind of thinking — and doing — that built the Pilbara in the first place.
It’s what has always set this State apart.
We’ve done it before.
And if we get serious about delivery — about partnerships, investment, and momentum — we can absolutely do it again.
Thanks for listening. And hopefully, for giving me a safe space for a few dangerous ideas.
Jessica Shaw
WA Program Director
Jessica Shaw is a former WA Parliamentarian (2017–2025) and Parliamentary Secretary to the Premier. She holds degrees in law, politics and international relations, a Master of Law from Cambridge, and has studied energy and climate policy at Harvard. She is a Fellow and Honorary Life Member of the Australian Institute of Energy. Jessica is also a Director of Tactica Advisory.
