Rachel Siewert (WA, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Excise Legislation Amendment (Condensate) Bill 2008 and Excise Tariff Amendment (Condensate) Bill 2008. It is just laughable to hear the opposition so stridently supporting corporate welfare. If I have this right, we gave this exemption as a subsidy to help an infant industry get up and running 30 years ago, and it is still going—so if you give a bit of support to an industry to get it up and running you can never take it away? What a load of rubbish! Are we always going to be handing out corporate welfare to industries that can well afford to support themselves? A profit of a billion dollars in six months was made by Woodside, the very company that we are now supposed to be continuing to subsidise—a billion dollars of profit in six months! Do not make me weep! At the same that we are talking about trying to get $30 a week extra for pensioners, Woodside have made a billion dollars of profit in six months. It does not match up to me. When are they going to wake up and smell the roses and realise that the community will not support that level of subsidy anymore? Look at what is happening in America at the moment. We have a financial crisis driven by greed—big corporates wanting more and more and more. The community over there is sick of it and the community over here is sick of it.

I just heard Senator Johnston talking about the swing to the Liberals at the recent Western Australian election. The Greens also did extremely well and received a big swing, which for me is a further indication that people are sick of corporate greed and the ‘me first’ approach and want to see some fairness back in the system. We have the big corporates, Woodside et al, saying, ‘We’ll pass it on to the consumer.’ I think consumers will see through that when they look at the profits these companies are making. ‘Oh, yeah, but we can’t afford this excise, so we’re going to make you pay.’ Why can’t they afford it? They made a billion dollars in six months. With the North West Shelf venture we are talking about BP, Chevron, Shell, BHP, Mitsubishi and Woodside. I do not think any of those companies are poor. In 2006 Woodside made record profits, and this year it has made a billion dollars in six months. Do not come to the Australian community and cry poor and say that this is going to hurt the consumers when you have been getting a subsidy, designed to get an infant industry up and running, inappropriately for 30 years—and now they want to keep it going? Let us keep them on the subsidy teat so they can make record profits again! Then, when the government talks about actually ending that subsidy, they cry poor and say, ‘You’re going to pay because we’re not going to take a cut in profits’—a level of profit they should not be earning because they have been getting a subsidy for years. How can we help other, new industries—for example, renewable energy industries—get up and running when we are still subsidising megacorporates? That subsidy was supposed to get them up and running and then end. How can we start supporting the fledgling, genuine, renewable energy industries to get up and running if we are still subsidising the megacorporate industries that are making record profits? It does not add up to me.

Woodside, at the same time they are crying poor, is behind Pluto, which is destroying the Burrup Peninsula and the world’s best rock art. Woodside prevented national heritage listing of its particular piece of the Burrup so that it could not get accused of destroying a national heritage site. Whether there is a national heritage listing on that area or not, it is still a natural heritage treasure—and Woodside is still moving and destroying that rock art. Here the coalition are, arguing to provide a subsidy to a company that is going in and destroying our national heritage. Woodside has for years been opposing recognition of the Burrup Peninsula and its internationally important rock art on the national heritage list. This is the very same company that, along with other companies, wants to go into the Kimberley. So now we are going to subsidise them to go into the Kimberley. I think they are big enough now to be able to survive on their own two feet without corporate welfare from the public purse. That has been going on for far too long. That money should be directed into genuinely helping the mums and dads and the pensioners of Australia. You cannot argue on the one hand for a rise in the pension and then on the other hand say, ‘Oh, we’re still going to support corporate subsidy and corporate welfare.’