Barnaby Joyce (New England, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. Since the commencement of hostilities in the Middle East, what actions has he had to assure Australia of security of fuel supplies, especially diesel, and how much diesel in days do we currently have in store on Australian soil?

Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the honourable member for the question. The answer to the question is 34 days in relation to diesel, 32 days in relation to jet fuel and 36 days in relation to petrol. I know he only asked me about diesel, but I think he would be interested in the other figures as well. I am pleased to say that these stocks are the highest they've been for any time in the past 15 years. I'm very pleased to say that. Obviously, the more fuel supply we have on hand, the better. I am very glad that we now have more than at any time in the past 15 years.

I do note that when we came to office, the stock was held in Texas and Louisiana. I'm not sure whether you'd call that the gulf of America or the Gulf of Mexico, but it's certainly not the gulf of Australia. We believe that our fuel supplies should be kept here—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister will just pause. He's talking about the fuel supply stock, which he was asked about. The member for New England on a point of order.

Barnaby Joyce (New England, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's on relevance. With respect, I did say 'on Australian soil'. What he's mentioning now is also what is at sea, on its way to Australia. They are on ships of convenience and can be directed away at any time.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He was asked about the security of our diesel supply and the supply of that stock. I'm just making sure, if the minister was asked a question about stock in Australia, that he is being directly relevant to the question he was asked.

Chris Bowen (McMahon, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change and Energy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to commend the member for the point of order. It's a reasonable point of clarification. Those figures only include fuel in Australia or on ships in our economic zone. Only that is what is included. Not ships that are some way away, whether they be in the Middle East or Singapore or the Gulf of Mexico. It is fuel in our exclusive economic zone. It is true that it is not all on land in Australia. My advice is that it does include fuel that is on the way to Australia, that is in our economic zone.

We believe it's appropriate, that's why we introduced minimum holding stocks. This was work that was not conducted by the previous government. The previous government saw four out of six petroleum refineries close when they were in charge—four out of six close. The two that we inherited are still in operation. That is not because of an accident; it's because of government and industry working together. We believe this is appropriate because what is required is to have stocks on hand for circumstances that are unpredictable globally and internationally.

As I said, the previous arrangement was that these stocks would be held overseas. In fact, I can refer the House to a press release from 8 March 2020 headed 'Visit to the United States of America'. It says:

Minister Taylor will hold bilateral discussions with US Energy Secretary … and sign a landmark arrangement with the United States that will allow Australia to access crude oil that is held in the US Strategic Petroleum Reserve during an emergency.

The giveaway is in the name—the US strategic reserve. We believe in a strategic reserve that is Australian and in Australia. It provides a greater level of convenient access if the soil is closer to where you are, not in the United States. Call us old-fashioned, but we believe that's a better approach—that is, to have that fuel either in Australia or on the way to Australia.

The member for New England raised a legitimate question, and my answer includes fuel that is on the way to Australia as we speak as well as fuel that is in Australia. That is a good thing. We think that is a better arrangement than the one we inherited.