A coalition of energy retailers, charging operators, and industry groups—including AGL, EnergyAustralia, ENGIE, Flow Power, JOLT, Tesla, and the Australian Energy Council—has raised concerns over a proposal by the Australian Energy Market Commission (AEMC) that would allow electricity network companies to own and operate public electric vehicle (EV) chargers. The coalition argues that this approach could result in households bearing the cost of new charging infrastructure without clear evidence that the investment will benefit consumers.

Traditionally, electricity networks have managed poles and wires, but under the AEMC’s draft rules, companies such as Ausgrid, Endeavour Energy, and Essential Energy could own chargers in regional areas and serve as providers of last resort in metropolitan locations where private operators are unwilling to install charging stations. The costs associated with this infrastructure would be included in the regulated asset base, enabling recovery through network charges applied to all electricity consumers over the infrastructure’s economic lifespan.

The coalition challenges the AEMC’s justification for network-owned chargers, citing the commission’s own modeling which indicates that each network-owned kerbside charger would need to induce between 1.5 and 3.8 additional EV purchases to validate the investment. However, the AEMC has acknowledged it cannot definitively confirm whether this threshold will be reached.

While the group supports expanding charging infrastructure—particularly to address regional charging gaps and enable faster grid connections—they urge the AEMC to focus electricity networks on their established roles involving grid connections, capacity, and access rather than permitting them to become direct competitors in the charging market. Coalition members warn that granting network operators ownership could distort competition, as these entities could leverage their regulated monopoly status and revenue streams to compete against private charging companies. This concern is heightened by the fact that many networks have ownership ties to major infrastructure investors and superannuation funds.

Critics contend that if private providers determine certain locations are not commercially viable, this does not automatically justify electricity networks stepping in to operate chargers at those sites. They emphasize that the financial risks associated with deploying and managing charging infrastructure should not be shifted onto electricity consumers, including households that do not own or use EVs.

The debate occurs amid broader national efforts to accelerate EV adoption as part of the Labor government’s plan to reduce Australia’s emissions by 62-70 percent by 2035. Transport electrification is expected to play a significant role in the emissions reduction strategy, and expanding public charging infrastructure is widely recognized as essential, especially for drivers without access to home or off-street parking.

The AEMC is expected to finalize its ruling on the regulatory framework for EV chargers in the near future, weighing the concerns of industry stakeholders against the need to support the country’s transition to electric transport.