Kate Thwaites (Jagajaga, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. How has the Albanese Labor government acted to strengthen Australia's fuel security and shield Australians from the impacts of the conflict in the Middle East? What policies would leave Australians more vulnerable?

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

I thank my honourable friend for the question and also recognise the invaluable work she does as a member of our climate and energy team in this government. In the face of the most serious energy crisis the world has ever seen, this government had the view that a very serious response was required. That response involved the Prime Minister interacting with leaders in our region to ensure fuel security, it involved the government working with Export Finance Australia to get extra fuel for Australians, and it involved working closely with the private sector in the face of great challenges, including one of our refineries catching on fire at the worst possible time.

In the face of all those challenges, I'm pleased to tell the House that Australia has more fuel today than at any time since the minimum stock obligation came into force and that we have substantially more fuel than we had on the day Iran was bombed. We have 44 days worth of petrol, which is eight days more than the day Iran was bombed. We have 39 days worth of diesel, which is seven days more, and we have three days more worth of jet fuel at 32 days. And there are 51 ships on the water currently on their way to Australia with more fuel and 3.9 billion litres of orders locked in and contracted to be delivered over the next four weeks. So Australians can know that, just as we have since 28 February been telling them that our fuel supply is secure, that situation remains and remains into the future.

There was a choice for people in public office to engage seriously with these challenges or to engage in politics—to engage in solutions or to engage in sledges. Those opposite chose sledges and chose insults, not ideas. They said to Australians that the shortages were coming and that rationing was coming—the parties to the Right. One Nation actually called for rationing, demanded rationing. We had the view that a calmer approach was necessary.

We had the view that a steadier approach was necessary, and the member for Wannon, my shadow minister, warned that rationing and shortages were coming. He said in March they were coming in April. He said in April they were coming in May. He said in May they're coming in June. In April he said, 'I say to Chris Bowen very clearly the time is that he focuses on diesel and makes sure we're going to have supplies into May and June.' Well, I've got good news for the member for Wannon. That is the case, and it's the case into the future as well. That's what this government has achieved.

We thank the private sector. We thank our trading partners for working closely with us. We do not thank those who engaged in sledges, not solutions. There was a time, as the minister for transport indicated, we got questions from those opposite about these issues, but now they don't like the answers. It was all about politics and not about petrol. It was all about point scoring, because those opposite are partisans, not patriots.