Joanna Gash (Gilmore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I concur with that, Madam Deputy Speaker. If the suggestion put by the Treasury Secretary, Ken Henry, to increase the price of petrol by 10c a litre is adopted, there will be a lot of unhappy motorists out there—none more so than in my electorate of Gilmore, where the car is necessarily and unavoidably king. Why? We have no real alternative public transport system to which people can turn and there are no trains past Bombaderry. Petrol taxes will soon be passed onto the consumer by way of increased fares for buses and trains. All freight costs will go up, driving up the cost of living. Who will be hit the hardest? It will be anybody of limited means, especially pensioners and the unemployed. The Senate Economics Committee concluded in their investigation of petrol prices in Australia:

Petrol prices in rural, regional and remote areas are on average, higher than prices in metropolitan areas.

Fuel for those people was described as:

… very much a non-discretionary commodity.

At one point, the price of petrol in Ulladulla and Batemans Bay reached $1.70 a litre. People who lived in the outlying areas of the bay and basin area simply reduced their travel. This had a direct impact on retailers in the major CBDs, who had fewer and fewer people coming through their doors. I well recall the howls from Labor at the time, when they were in opposition, to do something about the price of petrol. They wanted us to cut the GST on petrol; they wanted us to cut the excise. I also remember that when we suggested that Bob Carr, the then Premier of the New South Wales Labor government, adopt the Queensland pricing model to cut his share of the excise, we were met with a stony silence. We actually froze the excise in 2001, saving about 8c a litre at the time.

Despite this history, as recent as it is, Treasury is advocating that we hike the cost by another 10c a litre. Dr Henry also advocated an increase in diesel fuel excise for heavy vehicle operators as a precursor for other land transport reforms. If the government had any sense at all they would have no hesitation in discounting such a suggestion outright. This has got tax written all over it and disregards the economic consequences that impacted on Gilmore at that time. Ken Henry’s petrol tax will do nothing except bring money into Treasury’s coffers. If it could be shown that it would achieve something of benefit, I would take a serious look at it. But I cannot help but think about how the Rudd government want to impose another tax burden through their Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, which will also impact on motorists—and they do not need Ken Henry’s suggestions adding to that burden right now. But I do appreciate that, with the government’s massive and sometimes reckless spending, which drove up our deficit, someone will eventually have to pay for it. Let us hope that this revenue will not have to come from a Labor tax on the family home.