Garth Hamilton (Groom, Liberal National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Energy Security and Affordability) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) notes that:

(a) Australia's fuel security remains dangerously exposed, with the nation holding among the lowest levels of sovereign fuel reserves in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development;

(b) Australia imports over 90 per cent of its refined fuel, leaving critical supply chains vulnerable to geopolitical shocks, regional instability, and global market disruptions;

(c) regional, rural and transport-dependent communities are disproportionately exposed to fuel supply disruptions, particularly in the heavy vehicle and agricultural sectors;

(d) recent volatility in global fuel markets and the Government's failure to respond has massively increased costs for households and businesses, exacerbating cost of living pressures; and

(e) the Minister for Climate Change and Energy has:

(i) failed to deliver a comprehensive, whole-of-government fuel security strategy;

(ii) prioritised the net-zero energy transition without adequately safeguarding short-term liquid fuel resilience;

(iii) provided no clear contingency plan for maintaining diesel supply in the event of major import disruption; and

(iv) failed to provide certainty or support to transport operators exposed to volatile spot market fuel pricing;

(2) acknowledges that:

(a) fuel security is a matter of national security, economic stability, and community resilience; and

(b) reliable access to diesel is essential for freight, agriculture, mining, emergency services, and regional supply chains;

(3) calls on the Government to:

(a) urgently develop and implement a national fuel security plan, including increased onshore storage and refining capability;

(b) provide targeted support to transport operators, particularly small and owner-driver businesses, impacted by fuel price volatility;

(c) establish clear minimum stockholding obligations to meet or exceed international benchmarks; and

(d) deliver transparent reporting to Parliament on Australia's fuel security position and preparedness; and

(4) condemns the Minister for Climate Change and Energy for:

(a) failing to ensure Australia's fuel security at a time of increasing global uncertainty;

(b) neglecting the needs of regional Australia and the transport sector;

(c) placing ideological energy priorities ahead of practical national resilience; and

(d) being absent in a time of crisis, choosing to attend Conference of the Parties (COP) meetings instead of managing the crisis facing Australia.

Australia's fuel security remains dangerously exposed and, in moving this motion, I'm reminded of how long it took this government to accept the fact that we are in a fuel supply crisis. For weeks we were told there was no supply issue. We had that denial going on in this place in question time over and over again. What did we on this side of the House do? We laid out the blueprint for the response. We said, 'Simply look back to 2021 when we had the AdBlue crisis, when the coalition government forced the hand of the ACCC and forced the hand of the distributors to make sure that what was needed went to the people who needed it most.' We made sure that our trucks kept moving, our farmers kept farming and our miners kept mining. We did that, and we offered that blueprint. We said, 'Here's what to do.' Instead, what did we get? We got a minister telling our farmers to work from home and buy an EV. That message went down very well in my community! They really appreciated that! They thought that was excellent!

But why did we get this pretence from this minister? It's because, quite frankly, Chris Bowen is the Minister for Climate Change and Energy and he's big on the 'climate change' part. He wants to be president of COP31. He has put all of his attention into that. That's his focus. That's the international stage he gets to stride on. That's where he gets all the big pats on the back. But, when it comes to dealing with energy security and energy affordability, he has done very little to help this country. I point out that this is a minister who directed refineries in Australia to send liquid fuel that they were making here overseas. We were sending our liquid fuel away. Of course, through this whole period, what we've seen from this minister is an attempt, always, to blame everybody else for what's been happening. At the start of this crisis, he said it was right-wing scaremongering that was causing the crisis. Then it was panic-buying. Minister, you cannot panic-buy from an empty servo. We have empty servos throughout my region and just to the west. That's what we're dealing with. That's what we're experiencing.

This is an important conversation, because energy is the economy. Cheap energy is what drives national prosperity. We see that around the world. Other countries that are getting ahead of us and that are moving faster than us have cheap energy, and we've walked away from that. It goes beyond just wanting to bring back manufacturing. It goes beyond wanting to see more investment in farming or mining. It talks to our national strength. There is no military industrial complex without an industrial complex. If we can't make things then we have no ability to supply a front line. The greatest deterrent that we can have against foreign aggression is our ability to supply a front line, and we have left that aside. We have decided that it's more important to follow the 'climate change' part of the minister's remit than it is to focus on energy.

We are a little bit alone on this. The world's devotion to net zero and to focusing on climate change is shifting. We've seen that in the US, the UK and Canada and around the world. What are Japan doing right now? What Japan is doing in this fuel supply crisis is ramping up their coal-fired power stations because they want that cheap power. They know they need it. They know that's the way to get it. They're not afraid of saying the thing that is obvious. They're not afraid to say, 'The emperor has no clothes.' They are not afraid to say that coal is cheap and reliable and is an important part of the economy.

But don't just trust me on this. I may have my criticisms of the minister's work, but nothing tops what we hear today in the ABC, in an article from PK, Patricia Karvelas. This is the ABC, the far-right-wing fearmongering media piece that it is! Here's a quote from that article:

Energy Minister Chris Bowen has been the subject of deep internal criticism for what one senior Labor figure told me was his condescending style and failing to "meet the moment" with his language.

That's accurate. That is pinpoint accurate. It goes on further:

Albanese has now stepped in, standing next to him to deliver what have been daily updates about the government's handling of the fuel crisis.

Not only does this minister get someone to come in and do his job for him—the fuel crisis coordinator; he also gets the Prime Minister to hold his hand in press conferences because he is out of touch. He is completely out of control on this issue. If there's one little adage that we can see from this, it's quite simply that you can lead Chris Bowen to water, but you can't make him think. We've given him the answers. We've shown him the pathway, but he refuses to listen, and he's putting energy security last.

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Ben Small (Forrest, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Electoral Matters) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion and reserve my right to speak.

Rowan Holzberger (Forde, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I notice that the member for Groom has moved his motion and now has left the chamber, but, while I'm sure he's gone back to his room to follow this debate closely, it would have been nice to be able to address some of the things directly—through you, Deputy Speaker Buchholz—to him.

There were so many things in his speech that it's difficult to know where to start. He talked about there being a lack of industrial complex in this country, but he didn't look at the past, and it's amazing that anybody from that side can stand up here and talk about our de-industrialisation—which occurred under decades of rule of people from that side. But the member for Groom must have been very pleased with his candidate in the ever-continuing leadership race within the Liberal-National coalition, the member for Canning, talking on Insiders yesterday about how this is not the time to make a last stand for neo-liberalism in Australia. I'm sure that the member for Groom was very pleased with that statement and with that interview. But it does ignore the fact that, at the moment, his leader, the Leader of the Opposition, and the shadow treasurer are the two warriors in this place for neo-liberalism. So I think the member for Canning and the member for the Groom would be rightly concerned that those two are wanting to make the last stand for neo-liberalism, because it is very much that approach that has left us in the situation we're in today. That approach saw four out of our six refineries close under them, and this nation would dearly love to have them at the moment. It is very much the former government's complete abnegation of a role in the energy transformation within Australia and its complete lack involvement in the development of those key assets that have landed us in this situation we're in today.

When you look at what they want to do and you hear the member for Groom sneer at the role of the Minister for Climate Change and Energy, it really does, I think, indicate something. What I don't understand about the opposition is that it's a bit like one of those optical illusions. The opposition are trying to tell you that the lines aren't actually parallel, but the lines really are parallel when you take a look at it. Sometimes it can be so convincing that I just don't really know what they're getting at. Why would they want to get rid of the home battery scheme? They are so convincing, but, when you look at what they're trying to say, it just doesn't make any sense. They're just coming from this ideological position that somehow renewable energy has to be bad. Why would they get rid of the home battery scheme when it has resulted in 200,000 Australians now being able to basically take themselves off the grid? I don't get it. It is this approach, which they took through their time in government, that has meant that we have ended up in this situation we're in today.

I wish I had a bit longer to talk about a lot of the good things that this government is doing. I was listening to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy yesterday when he was talking about what we've got here. The Minister for Climate Change and Energy said:

Firstly, Australia now has 39 days of petrol, 1.6 billion litres, which is up very slightly. Diesel, 30 days, which is pretty flat at 2.7 billion litres. And jet fuel, 30 days also, 828 million litres. What that tells me is that while the fuel is flowing strongly out the door, especially to regional Australia, it also continues to flow in the door, that every expected arrival has arrived and that our international supply chain remains secure at this point, as we've said all the way along. That's important to reassure Australians.

Instead of trying to reassure Australians, the opposition is more determined to make a political point and prove its ideological point than it is to actually look after the economy and look after the people of Australia. I think they should really take a bit of a hard look at themselves before they criticise the government any further.

Ben Small (Forrest, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Electoral Matters) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The saying goes: never waste a crisis. Indeed this is a crisis in Minister Bowen's own words. During a crisis, it's reasonable for Australians to look to their government for leadership, for options and for a plan. Instead of the spin and rhetoric that we heard from the 'minister for climate change and a little bit of energy', which was well spoken about by the member for Groom, I'd like today to focus on what the government isn't doing. The government isn't proposing serious policy reform that will enable Australia to once again be an energy independent, sovereign and resilient nation.

How did we get here? We got here because net zero policies have prevented oil developments in Australia from being funded and financed. Our large banks have publicly and loudly declared since 2023 that they will no longer fund oil developments in Australia. Then we wonder why we are a nation that is dependent on imports from overseas for more than 90 per cent of our liquid fuels. Why are we not talking about banning those who hold banking and credit licences in Australia from defunding a legitimate and lawful exploitation of hydrocarbons in this country? That is action No. 1 the government could take today to set the conditions for Australia to resolve this crisis and emerge from it a stronger nation.

Industry super funds and their activist directors that are plonked on company boards are more focused on DEI than they are on drilling. That needs to change and it needs to change now. This also caused a finance problem. Ultimately, our banks and finance companies responded to activist pressure. So let's bring on a real debate about limiting shareholder activism in Australia where it distracts companies from doing what they ought to be doing.

Project approvals in this country for oil and gas developments are pushing towards a decade. Of course, that can blow out when they're subject to extensive lawfare. The use of AI and other technologies to get approvals down should be the goal of this government during this crisis. Why is it that we can't use AI to get projects approved in three months? Why is it that we see these endless and largely baseless, very vexatious appeals clogging up our courts and holding back our companies from developing energy infrastructure in Australia? Well, a big part of it is the Environmental Defenders Office that this government continues to feed money to. We saw most recently, in the case of the Barossa project, that the EDO and their cronies in the green movement had used a totally baseless so-called expert to hold up a billion-dollar project on the basis of an absolute fiction. That needs to stop, it needs to stop now and the government should be taking action in this respect.

When it comes to the importation of oil and, indeed, everything that comes to and leaves this country in a ship, the obvious imperative is that we have a capability as a sovereign nation with skilled seafarers. It takes 10 years to train a ship's captain but only 18 months to build a tanker. The importance of starting this process today, during the depths of an energy crisis, can't be overstated. Every day LNG, coal and iron ore ships leave Australia bound for markets throughout South-East Asia, and we have an opportunity to get seafarers on those ships. If we adopted UK-style income tax exemptions for seafarers outside the country for more than 180 days a year, that would narrow the gap between employing Australians and employing international seafarers, ensure the government shares just a trifling amount of the cost, and set us up for long-term success.

The answer isn't always more spending. That's where this government is going wrong, even in the depths of an energy crisis. Expedited approvals and creation of special economic zones, or even thinking about investment incentives in an industry focused way, rather than a geographically focused way, is the sort of big-picture thinking that you'd expect from a government who was prepared to lead this country out of a crisis with a view to leaving us stronger, more prosperous and more resilient as a country. Thinking differently about this means costing these sorts of initiatives differently as well. Ultimately, there's no taxation revenue to forgo where there is no industrial activity occurring in the first place. We need solutions from the government, and we're getting none.

Julie-Ann Campbell (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What a truly bizarre contribution from the member for Forrest—extraordinary, bizarre and a bit wild. The member for Forrest has just got up here to bang on about denigrating net zero when net zero has given many, through an incredibly challenging time, electrification, which has helped inoculate them from an incredibly difficult time when it comes to fuel. The member for Forrest has gotten up attacking industry super—superannuation that the coalition, throughout their entire time in this place, have always spoken against, have always said that they didn't agree with. Superannuation is something, right now, that is securing the futures of millions of Australians across this country. The member for Forrest got up and started talking about cronies and DEI. I tell you what: right now is not the time for that kind of contribution, because right now is a serious time.

Fuel is not just unleaded and it's not just diesel either. Fuel is what helps us get from home to work and back again, fuel is what helps us get produce from farms to the supermarket to people's tables, fuel is what helps cart the kids around to Saturday morning sports and fuel is what helps us make sure that Australians get the support they need when their health is in trouble. It is a critical part of our way of life in this country, and right now Australians are truly feeling the rise of those costs. They're feeling it at the hip pocket. They're also feeling it when they go to the grocery store. They're feeling it when they pay their bills. This is something that is impacting so many people and families across our country. It's important that we take that impact seriously and that we act, which is what the Albanese Labor government is doing.

Right now there is a war in the Middle East. There is global uncertainty, and this is being felt not just in our country but in so many different places across the world. What that demands is not cheap talk. What that demands is not puffery from the member for Forrest. What it demands is a plan and putting that plan into action, and the Albanese Labor government has done just that.

We are not only globally well placed but we have also focused on three core things to make sure that we can get Australians the relief that they need. First, we know that we need to get fuel into this country and we need to keep fuel in this country, and that's why the Albanese Labor government has temporarily amended the fuel standards. It's why we've released 20 per cent of the baseline stockholding, it's why we brought our reserves back to this country so that they could be accessed when Australians needed them and it's why we're underwriting the purchase of fuel being sold on international markets by the private sector.

Second is getting fuel to the people who need it, and that's why we were in this place last week moving legislation to ensure that truck drivers are treated fairly and to ensure that the movement of goods is protected through a difficult time. It's why this government has been a driver of coordination not just between experts and between stakeholders but between leaders across our country, with a taskforce designed to make sure that we continue to coordinate, continue to take action and continue to roll out that plan.

What beggars belief in this place is that those opposite oversaw the closure of two-thirds of the country's refineries. What beggars belief in this place is that the opposition stored fuel reserves on the other side of the globe, on the other side of the world, on another continent. And what beggars belief is that they oversaw the closures of urea facilities. Australians deserve better than that.

Leon Rebello (McPherson, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on fuel security. Now, fuel security is not an abstract policy issue; it's a national security and economic stability issue impacting the daily life of Australians. Before I start, I'd like to just touch on the contribution of the member for Moreton. The member for Moreton said, 'Right now is a serious time.' I hope the member reminds the Prime Minister and the Minister for Climate Change and Energy that it is a serious time the next time that they enter this chamber during question time. They avoid answering our questions and they laugh in the opposition's face. I hope that the member reminds the Prime Minister and the Minister for Climate Change and Energy that this is in fact a serious time.

Right now as a country, and this motion touches on this, we are quite dangerously exposed. As a country, we're importing over 90 per cent of our refined fuel, and we hold some of the lowest reserves in the OECD. That's very important because it leaves us vulnerable to global shocks, to conflict and to supply disruptions and, when that happens, it's not just Canberra that feels it; it's families, it's farmers, it's truckies and it's regional communities.

At a time when we are uncertain about fuel supply in this country, we're seeing mixed messages coming from those opposite. First, it was 'no problem' then we heard 'don't panic' then we heard, 'Oh, it's the fault of Australians who are going out and buying too much petrol.' Now we're hearing language surrounding a national crisis, with advice to people across the country to work from home. Not only does that kind of mixed messaging provide uncertainty but it also undermines the level of confidence that I think Australians require at this time from their government, because, if supply is truly strong, why is it that shipments are being cancelled or delayed? Why are Australians being told to change their behaviour? Why are fuel stations running out of petrol? On Friday I received contact from constituents to advise me that in my electorate of McPherson on of the most well-known fuel stations down the southern end in Bilinga had gone through this experience, and my understanding is that they continue to do so. This points to a system failure in relation to distribution, not just supply.

The coalition has been trying to bring the government to act for some time over the last few weeks, and now we're seeing in this place that, despite the fact that we've had four out of the last five weeks sitting here in Canberra, we have a situation where the government is looking to all of a sudden wake up to the fact that there is a fuel crisis and to try and get some legislation through the parliament. Let's not forget that ensuring fuel gets through the system is the responsibility of the minister. But what are we seeing? We're seeing this part-time energy minister instead outsourcing responsibility to taskforces, to the ACCC, to people who don't always believe in fuel itself. The coalition has come out in support of halving the fuel excise, and I say to every Australian to look at their representatives, especially those who have representatives who are members of the government. They should be able to look at them and tell them that for every single day that the Prime Minister doesn't do that Australians are paying an extra $16 million in fuel right in the midst of a fuel crisis.

When fuel doesn't reach where it's needed and when supply is low and the costs are high, we see a whole heap of other consequences. We see food production being disrupted, regional economies disrupted, freight slowing and many other consequences. The coalition has in the past recognised fuel security as a national vulnerability. This happened during COVID. We saved Australia's last two refineries, legislated the Fuel Security Act, introduced the minimum stockholding obligation and delivered a 40 per cent increase in diesel reserves. We can't have the government's endless pursuit of net zero coming at the cost of basic supply security. That's why I say to this government: come to the table, get some action on the plate and let's address this issue for the benefit of Australians.

Zaneta Mascarenhas (Swan, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I recognise that households, businesses and farmers are facing fuel uncertainty right now, and I know that this is something that is having rippling affects across Australia. The thing that I also know is that the people of Australia recognise that it was not the Australian government that organised the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and that it's not because of the Australian government decisions or actions. What we are seeing right now is the largest disruption to global energy supply since the 1970s. This is a crisis that we are currently living through which has been triggered by a war, a war that has blocked the channel through which 20 per cent of the world's oil passes.

Australians deserve to know that this government is a government that is listening and acting, and we are continuing to act immediately and decisively. We're doing this because we recognise that farmers, truckies, regional families and those people in cities as well are feeling what is happening at the fuel pumps right now. Interestingly, the motion that is before us calls for actions that we have actually already taking. Minimum stockholding obligations—we've implemented them. The minimum stockholding obligation covers 98 per cent of all diesel and 100 per cent of petrol and jet fuel in Australia, and we strengthened the diesel requirements further in 2024. On the question of transparent reporting, we publish the MSO stock data every Saturday. When the crisis hit, we moved fast. We released 762 million litres from the strategic reserve. We amended the fuel quality standards to unlock a further 100 million litres of fuel supply per month. We have also convened the National Oil Supplies Emergency Committee six times since 1 March. And this weekend the Prime Minister announced that the government will underwrite additional fuel shipments directly, carrying the financial risk so that suppliers can secure cargoes that otherwise could not be afforded. This is legislation that will be introduced into the House today. Independent energy analysts have called this the right move.

We are making changes to protect Australia's security. But those opposite deserve a moment because they brought this motion. Four refineries closed under the coalition. Two of them closed while the current opposition leader was the energy minister. When BP closed the Kwinana refinery, the only refinery in Western Australia, he said:

Closure of the refinery will not negatively impact Australia's fuel supplies.

When ExxonMobil closed Altona, he said it again. He was wrong. And, rather than build storage here, the coalition spent $100 million storing oil—less than two days of Australia's supply—in Texas, 14,000 km away on an entirely different continent and in a different hemisphere.

The people of Australia are not watching this debate to see who scores points. They're watching because they are worried, because they are filling up the tank and watching the number climb, and because fuel prices flow through to groceries, to freight and to everything on the shelf. The pressure is real, and that's why we've empowered the ACCC with strengthened penalties to go after price gouging. It is why we targeted relief specifically at regional areas, where supply chains are the longest. It's why this government has delivered tax cuts for all 14 million Australian taxpayers, with the average worker to be around $43 a week better off from 1 July.

This motion condemns the government for failing to act. The facts say otherwise. We implemented the obligations that they only promised. We kept open refineries that they let close. We store fuel here, not in Texas. But the most important thing that I can say is not about them; it's about the families in our electorates, the farmers in regional WA and the truckies keeping this country moving. Australia needs a government that's focused on them and not on fighting the opposition. That's what we're doing. We're fighting for the good people of Australia.

Tony Pasin (Barker, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister Assisting for Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on this motion, and I do so at a time when Australia's fuel security is not just under pressure but dangerously exposed. Our nation is a nation that runs on diesel—the mining sector, the agriculture sector, the transport sector. I think everyone in this place can agree on that—in fact, there is no argument. But politics is the art of knowing what comes next. The problem we have with the Minister for Climate Change and Energy, and the Prime Minister as well, is not that they don't know what comes next; it's that they don't know what just happened. That's the problem. I had the privilege of sitting in this place during one of the most challenging times in our nation's history, COVID—as did you, Deputy Speaker Buchholz. I know, from being around tables where senior decision-makers were making decisions during that crisis, that they weren't focused on what was happening 'just now'; they were focused on what was about to happen and what was going to happen after that.

You see, that is the point. We have a minister for climate change and energy who, for a couple of weeks, said: 'Crisis? What crisis? There's no crisis—nothing to see here.' I don't think he just said that in question time. From what we can see now, that was informing his decisions day by day. So, at the time when critical decisions had to be made to get in front of the curve—not flatten the curve but get in front of the curve—he was sitting down, presumably with his head in the sand, going: 'No problem. It'll all go away.'

Now, the member for Swan just made an interesting contribution. I think she used the word 'crisis' about a dozen times. Do you know what? Those opposite—and particularly the minister—have been mugged by reality. He's been mugged by the reality that it actually is a crisis.

You know when you pull up to a petrol station and the bowser's on empty? I had this experience myself. This was about four weeks ago. I was coming back to Canberra; I was travelling from Mount Gambier to Adelaide. I had about 100 kilometres of fuel, and I thought, 'Oh, just pull into Naracoorte and fill up.' Well, guess what? There was no fuel in Naracoorte. I could barely believe it. I posted a photograph about that, and, lo and behold, 200-odd thousand people looked at that photograph. I made it, just, to Keith, a hundred kilometres down the road. And never ever in my life have I had that experience. Plenty of times I've had the experience where I've thought, 'Look, Tony, you've overcooked it; you won't make it to the next town,' but I've never had to think at the same time, 'Gee, I hope that town has fuel.' Unbelievable!

The reality is: those opposite have now been mugged by reality. If we're talking about what comes next, can I say to those opposite: supply is one problem—it's the pre-eminent and first priority, of course, because, without supply, as I said, a nation that runs on diesel grinds to a halt—but let's talk about price right now. I spent Saturday morning with a business operator who, in fact, I sat next to in year 8, all the way back when. He runs South West Freight, a small to medium trucking enterprise. You're familiar with this industry, Mr Deputy Speaker Buchholz. His fuel bill has gone from $5 million a year to $10 million a year. He's looking at trucks parked up in his yard. I then, over the course of the weekend, had the great opportunity to meet up with some dairy farmers in my electorate. A heap of them came to a particular dairy because they knew I was going to catch up with one farmer, and one dairy farmer said, 'Tony, we run 11 diesel engines.' This is a dairy farm that's not on the grid—not because they want to be green; they're just simply not on the grid. They have to rely on diesel generation for the electricity to run their pumps, their irrigation systems and, indeed, the dairy. These aren't people that can pass these prices on.

So, in effect, what we have is that those opposite—who have spent the large share of the last decade demonising fossil fuels and the people that drill for them, refine them and deliver them to our economy—right now are asking for forgiveness and praying that the very people they've demonised over the course of the last decade can get them out of this very, very hot water. To those opposite: Accept our proposal to reduce fuel taxes in this country. Give Australians some relief. And do it today.

Susan Templeman (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We, the Albanese government, are looking at every practical measure that we can to shield Australians from the very worst of this global uncertainty. And, globally, it is a crisis. What we're seeing at home is the need to really manage not just the supply of fuel that comes to our shores, but also the distribution, so that it fairly gets around our country. National Cabinet is convening again today, to further coordinate activity and make sure that we have national consistency.

We know Australians are following events in the Middle East, and we also know that they are seeing and feeling the consequences here at home. In my own electorate—a peri-urban electorate, where you can't easily switch to public transport for every purpose—we are really feeling the effects of an uneven distribution of fuel, and certainly, in the last week or two, that has had its impacts. In my area, where we have agriculture, many construction workers and many, many tradies, we need to see steady diesel, as well as petrol. That, of course, is the role that, together, at a federal and state level, working with the industry, we will be aiming to achieve.

I think it's obvious to all of us that, the longer this goes on, the more significant the impact will be. The longer the Middle East war goes on, the harder it will get for us. And so our job, as a government, is not just to think about now, and the immediate needs, but also to think forward and to make sure that our farmers, and communities like mine, our more regional communities, can all get the fuel that they need.

I want to particularly talk about one part of my community, and that's the Hawkesbury turf growers. A major concern for them is ensuring that their businesses, which use diesel in every part of the business—on the tractors, on the mowers, on the pumps, on the harvesters, on the trucks—have access to a supply. I want to ensure that when we talk about distributing diesel across the country, we don't forget the peri-urban areas, which are so dependent on it. Like everyone, they are increasing prices and resorting to temporary levies for their clients to cover it, but it's a big issue for jobs that are some way off but have already been quoted before this fuel price rise and availability hit.

There are also cases of turf growers getting yelled at when they go to petrol stations with their regular vehicles, their regular trucks and containers to get their diesel fuel. I want to encourage people to think about how it's not just day-to-day drivers, mums and dads driving kids around; we've got turf growers, agricultural people, the equine sector who all have a pattern of accessing their fuel. They are doing what they always do at the petrol station. They deserve respect for that and they deserve to be able to access the normal supplies that they normally would.

As the member for Macquarie, my job is to raise these issues with the government, and that's what I've been doing. I'm very pleased to see the things that we've done to support consumers. We have passed new laws to double the penalties for petrol companies that are taking unfair advantage of this situation. We have the new National Fuel Supply Taskforce. Its coordinator, Anthea Harris, has been working to ensure that all the different bits of the system are talking together. It's absolutely crucial that that happens. We have released 20 per cent of Australia's fuel reserves, and that has been particularly targeted at regional areas. We have temporarily changed petrol and diesel standards so more fuel can flow. That's why there is a supply of fuel now. That's why it isn't a crisis here, but there are distribution issues that are impacting the ease and readiness with which people have been able to access it.

We have also made it easier for Australia's refineries to access government funding when they run at a loss, because we don't want any brakes on their ability to produce. After we suffered the opposition in government for nearly a decade, the two refineries that remain are vital to our supply, and we are supporting them. We have also indicated a change to the law so that we can bring more fuel and we can help subsidise or underwrite whatever mechanism is needed to bring fuel in offshore. These are practical things, and we will do everything that is needed.

Scott Buchholz (Wright, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There being no further speakers, the time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.