Helen Polley (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator McKim has submitted a proposal, under standing order 75, today, which has been circulated and is shown on the Dynamic Red:

That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:

The need for the government to finally introduce a minimum 25 per cent tax on gas exports to ensure Australians receive a fair return from our gas resources, as gas corporations including Shell, Santos and Woodside benefit from reported war-driven windfall revenues while Australians continue to face high energy prices and a cost-of-living crisis.

Is consideration of the proposal supported?

More than the number of senators required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

With the concurrence of the Senate, the clerks will set the clock in line with the informal arrangements made by the whips.

Steph Hodgins-May (Victoria, Australian Greens) | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:

The need for the government to finally introduce a minimum 25 per cent tax on gas exports to ensure Australians receive a fair return from our gas resources, as gas corporations including Shell, Santos and Woodside benefit from reported war-driven windfall revenues while Australians continue to face high energy prices and a cost-of-living crisis.

Today we are here to discuss the need for a gas export tax in this country. Seven in 10 Australians are demanding that this place show the leadership expected of them and tax our multinational gas giants and get a fair share back for Australia from our gas. The government and the corporate parties in here are faced with a political choice today. Will they side up and saddle up with their corporate gas donors, or will they vote with the Australian people who are demanding a fair return on Australia's gas and who are demanding at least a 25 per cent tax on gas exports?

We are at a time when we are seeing massive corporations like Woodside, Santos and Shell reporting record wartime profits. They are making billions of dollars in revenue and profits, yet the government tells us that now is not the time to act. If it is not the time to act now, when these multinational corporations are raking it in and Aussies are doing it tough—they are literally budgeting down to the dollar in a cost-of-living crisis and making impossible decisions about whether to fill the car, whether to buy some fresh groceries or whether to get their medication—then when will it be? This government has been unwilling to stare down around 12 multinational gas exporters and say, 'Hang on, guys; it's time for you to pay your fair share. Instead, they are looking down the barrel of knocking 160,000 people off the NDIS. What an utter shame! Seven in 10 Australians support a gas export tax. Will this Labor government today do what it was elected to do and represent those people instead of its corporate donors?

The Greens led an inquiry into a gas tax or into the taxation of Australia's resources, and we heard that Japan makes more money off Australian gas than Australia does. That is outrageous. We heard that this export tax will be borne by the producers—not by other trading nations and not by the Australian public but by the producers, who are making record wartime profits. We heard that millions of dollars were spent by these same gas exporters trying to kill this gas export tax and that they were going to attend Labor's $5,500-a-head post-budget-night fundraiser. It is outrageous. We are seeing donations funnelled into the corporate parties from the likes of Woodside and Santos. In the last 10 years, Woodside have donated $1.2 million. When I asked them, 'What do you get for this donation or investment?' they replied, 'Oh, we get policy meetings.' I mean, come on! We are in this place to do a job, represent the people and have meetings, and they shouldn't cost. It's outrageous.

Even at Labor's own national conference, their own rank-and-file members believed that Australia should get a fair share from Australia's resources. And what does the Prime Minister respond with? He calls this campaign and this push that was driven by the unions a slogan, nonsense and BS. This is not a slogan; this is a demand from the Australian people to do what you're elected to do. As recently as yesterday, the Prime Minister couldn't even bring himself to put the two words in the same sentence. He couldn't even say 'gas tax' when he was asked by my colleague in the lower house about this—pathetic! It is time for political leadership and time for a gas tax. Let's get it done. We can do it today. (Time expired)

Susan McDonald (Queensland, National Party, Shadow Minister for Resources and Northern Australia) | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to oppose this ridiculous rehash of a motion. We have discussed this previously. We had an entire Senate inquiry into this notion, which was filled with absolute lies, mistruths and misrepresentations. In fact, we've just heard some of them repeated again, even though the evidence does not support the view that Japan makes more tax out of Australia's gas than Australia does. It was clearly demonstrated. We had evidence on this, and yet we have to continue listening to this absolute rubbish.

There are no new ideas coming out of this, because this is not a grassroots campaign to get a fair share on our resources. To be clear, this is not an argument based on fact or economics; this is an activist run campaign, a thinly veiled attempt to shut down fossil fuels and future prosperity in this country. The Greens political party know this. They know what they are doing.

So let's be very, very clear about what's behind this. Despite the calls for transparency and clarity on donations, the reason why you know donations from gas companies is that they comply with the rule of law in Australia. They comply with legislation, unlike the donations that are flowing in, in the hundreds of millions of dollars, to the Environmental Defenders Office—millions of taxpayers' dollars that they took to make fake evidence in court. What about the IEEFA and the Australia Institute? They trumpet the need for openness and transparency, yet they do not disclose where their money comes from. We should care about that. When there are activist organisations seeking to alter the political path of this country, to alter the domestic security of our energy supplies and to distort the future prosperity of Australia, the jobs of thousands of Australians and the $22 billion in state and federal taxes and royalties received from the gas industry, we should know where their money comes from. Fortunately, in the US, they have a transparency register for these people, so we see some of the breadcrumbs of their work. But they have absolutely stated they want to shut down fossil fuels around the world, and Australia has been their working ground.

I understand economics. I desperately want to see future prosperity for this country. It's why I came to parliament. I believe in building Australia and more income for Australia to ensure that we are the First World, prosperous nation that we've enjoyed being in the past. We have received billions of dollars from the resources sector and have fantastically well-paid jobs worth double what most of us enjoy. In fact, currently, we've got electricians working in the gas industry who are on $400,000 a year. That will not last if this campaign is successful.

In 2014, the Secretary General of NATO demonstrated that the anti-fracking, anti-gas campaign in Europe and in the UK was run by Russian money. That campaign sought to undermine the UK's energy sovereignty and financial resilience. It was allegedly to increase Europe's reliance on Russian energy sources. We saw how that worked out. The Russian pipeline got blown up, and Europe and the UK in particular were on their knees. That's the goal here. The goal is to reduce Australia's energy sovereignty and our financial independence. This is not a fantasy. It's not a James Bond thriller. This is happening right now, under our noses, because we do not demand the same transparency and scrutiny that we do of politicians. We can't take money from overseas sources. Anybody who gives to us, we have to disclose. So I ask the Greens political party who sit opposite us: on whose behalf are you acting when you push this campaign? Because it's certainly not in Australia's interest.

Varun Ghosh (WA, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

Gas is an incredibly important resource for Australia. It's important to our economy. It supports thousands of jobs across the country, contributes billions of dollars to the economy as a whole and brings in vital export revenue. That revenue is used to directly and indirectly increase the standards of living of Australians. As a flexible source of power, it is a vital element in our transition plan to a renewable economy and energy grid. As we phase out coal and bring on new renewable energy sources, we need gas to firm it. Gas is also a really important industrial feedstock for a number of industries in Western Australia, and it's a really important fuel for those hard-to-abate energy needs in other parts of the Western Australian industry, including the resources industry.

I'd also say that our reliability as a gas exporter is vital to maintaining strong trade relations with regional allies and partners. Our stability in providing exports to our trade partners during the most recent energy crisis that was created by conflict in the Middle East ensured that Australia was able to leverage those relationships—as ably demonstrated by the efforts of the Prime Minister and the Foreign minister, among others—to ensure that we didn't run out of fuel at a key time and that our fuel supplies remained stable.

A 25 per cent export tax, taken at face value, may well be a good-faith effort to increase the revenue gained off the gas industry. That wasn't the substance of some of the submissions we heard at the inquiry. Some of them were very clear that the purpose of this tax was to tax the industry out of existence—to make it economically unviable. I think our starting point would be the same in terms of getting a fair share from our resources, and the question is how you do that.

One of the interesting parts of sitting on an inquiry and listening to a really large range of people across a relatively short period of time but in quite a lot of detail is that there are a number of different ways you could do this. There is the current petroleum resource rent tax. There's what would be called a Brown tax. There's a wellhead royalty. You could put in place an export tax. There are a range of different ways to do it, but all of them have consequences for the industry, for energy supply in Australia and for investment in energy long term. You need to get into the detail of all that. What emerged from the inquiry is that a 25 per cent export tax was a figure plucked out of nowhere. There was no empirical basis given by any of the advocates other than the amount of money that it would actually raise. And that's okay. That can be superficially appealing. I get that. There's an elemental speciousness to it. But, in terms of actually designing a policy that delivers a return for Australians while also ensuring our energy security, it needs to go a bit further than that and it needs to be better calibrated.

We've already seen a number of changes to the PRRT under this government that have increased the amount of revenue collected, and our goal is to get a fair share. If the Australian people are saying that they think we're not currently getting that or won't get it in the future then that's obviously something that we need to look at, but we need to do it in a way that is calibrated with the other objectives in this space—namely, having a gas industry that permits a transition to a renewable energy grid, having an industry that provides energy for Australians and doing it in a way that doesn't kill standards of living and doesn't destroy important parts of our industry. That's really the overarching thing.

The other point is—and I know there are different views on this in this chamber—that the government's also just set up a national domestic reservation in the gas industry for 20 per cent. That means that we're trying to guide gas that's produced in Australia into Australian industries to bring energy prices down and to stimulate or turbocharge our industries. That is, I think, part of the problem as well. When you've got that policy being rolled out at the moment in order to deliver domestic reservation, which is in effect a kind of tax on the industry, the idea that you would then put a 25 per cent export tax on top of that is potentially devastating to that industry. It might destroy investment in that industry in Australia. The result in the long term would be an Australia that's poorer, that's less energy secure, that's less able to do an energy transition and which ultimately will collect less tax from this industry.

Rather than pushing for an arbitrary tax that doesn't actually have a foundation other than that people like the dollar figure at the end of it, I think where we landed in the report was that we wanted to investigate the options available and look at ways to ensure we're getting a fair share in a way that doesn't distort or destroy the industry or create perverse incentives within certain markets or industries. That was the recommendation of the government members in the gas tax inquiry—that there were a number of options that were worthy of investigation to try and both ensure the viability of the industry and also increase the revenue that Australians receive from it. That's the course we'd advocate for. (Time expired)

David Pocock (ACT, Independent) | Link to this | Hansard source

Australians know that, once our resources are gone, they're gone. There's no getting them back. There's no having regret after the fact. We had this incredible amount of gas that was exported from this country and yet we look at our national deficit and it's hurtling towards $1 trillion of national debt. It's cold comfort to them to hear a government that is regurgitating lines from the gas industry, despite a proposal from the ACTU. The Australian Council of Trade Unions put forward the proposal that a 25 per cent gas export tax was a way for Australians to get a fair return from the gas that we export and a way to reduce the price of gas in Australia for manufacturers, households and businesses. And yet we've got the Labor Party not just voting against but arguing against a proposal like this which the vast majority of Australians support.

We're not making decisions in this place like we want to be here for a long time. We're not saying: 'We have this resource. It's finite. It needs to be part of the transition. Let's actually get a fair return for it.' We're happy to flog it off, take the crumbs and then repeat what the gas industry says. For many years they were in denial about this. They were. They said: 'Absolutely not. It can't happen.' Now they're in delay mode. They realise that the vast majority of Australians want a better deal, and so the gas industry is trying to delay it and now the Labor Party is trying to delay it. They're saying, 'The petroleum resource rent tax, down the track, will give us a return.' When you look at the Treasury numbers, we get almost as much from passport fees in this country as we do from the petroleum resource rent tax.

Aussies aren't buying this. No wonder they're looking at the major parties and going, 'Well, who are you guys serving? Are you in there to make good decisions for us or are you shilling for the gas industry and shilling for the gambling industry?' What are we here to do? This is a finite resource that belongs to all Australians. While we delay, while we dither and while the government doesn't have the guts to put in a windfall profits tax, companies like Woodside are laughing all the way to the bank. We'll see LNG revenue climb from $59 billion last financial year to $65 billion in 2027. You've got Woodside saying that they've had a 28 per cent jump in revenue—$6 billion in the past three months—and they've exported less gas. And the government says, 'All good mate; all good.' (Time expired)

Larissa Waters (Queensland, Australian Greens) | Link to this | Hansard source

Actions speak louder than words. Labor's national platform was just amended so that it says that the party wants to ensure a fairer return from our natural resources. Today, the Greens are giving the government a chance to vote the way that their own members want them to and to vote for a minimum 25 per cent tax on gas exports.

Right now, Australians are being taken for a ride. Japan makes more money off Australia's gas than Australians do. They've had a tax on gas imports for some 50 years. They've made $8 billion a year for the last five years largely off our gas—$8 billion—while we give it away virtually for free. Those numbers just don't add up, and they're not adding up for Australians either. That's why poll after poll shows that a majority of people support a minimum 25 per cent tax on gas exports. That's why, just a few weeks ago, my colleague Senator Allman-Payne and I had 80 people packed into a pub on the Sunny Coast, and 75 of them left with signs saying, 'Tax gas exports' for their fences. That's why hundreds of Queenslanders turned out last weekend to wave those same signs all the way from Gladstone down to the Gold Coast.

People are getting behind this campaign because they know that the big gas corporations are ripping them off. One in three big corporations pays no corporate tax at all, including Santos, one of the biggest gas producers and exporters in Australia. In the three months after the war in Iran began, Woodside Energy reported nearly a 30 per cent jump in revenue. Not only are they killing the planet; they're making a killing while they do it.

A minimum 25 per cent gas export tax could raise around $17 billion every single year. We could use that revenue to actually help people in what is a deep and abiding cost-of-living crisis. Imagine that. Instead of leaving $17 billion in the pockets of the gas corporations, we could use it to put dental and mental health care into Medicare. Imagine that we could use it to build more public and affordable homes for people. We could fully fund public schools. We could make university free again and cancel student debt. We could put solar and batteries on every single roof in this country and invest in sustainable biofuels so that we're protected from the next fuel crisis and have real energy independence in a way that helps us tackle the climate crisis at the same time. That's the sort of thing that $17 billion could be used for—to actually help Australians.

Labor is feeling the heat from the public on this, and that's why they've changed their party platform. But words are not action. Today, the Greens are giving Labor the opportunity to act and to vote for a gas export tax, because governments should work for people, not corporate profits. It is about time that this government started saying no to their corporate donors and started acting in the interests of Australians. That is your job as representatives and as the government that the people have elected. You're meant to be working for people. Instead, we see the Prime Minister continually delivering for the gas corporations and for the other corporate donors that fuel his re-election coffers. People are sick of it. They are seeing it more clearly. This government works for big corporations and it puts Australians last, and they're sick of it, folks. So vote for a gas tax already. (Time expired)

Pauline Hanson (Queensland, Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

Any time the Greens get up to talk about how we should manage our energy, it should be met with extreme scepticism. They aren't interested in lowering the cost of power, food or goods for everyday Australians. Their only objective is destroying the gas industry for wild net zero ideology. This proposed export tax is the vehicle to achieve that objective. What it will mean for Australians in the long term is less investment, less supply, less tax and higher prices. We need solutions that prioritise investment and development in our incredible energy resources. We want more gas, more oil and more energy.

Labor's new gas scheme is just as damaging to this vital sector. Their ill-conceived reservation policy is facing backlash from industry as producers scramble alongside Labor ministers to figure out exactly what they are expected to do. Labor doesn't have the answers. The best they can tell us is that it will be up to the minister from year to year. How can we be expected to attract the billions of dollars in investment required for these projects when this government provides no policy certainty? It is irresponsible to treat such a critical industry with this level of disdain.

One Nation has developed a policy that will deliver more gas and more energy cheaper. Our policy encourages investment and exploration of our resources. We would invest alongside industry and leverage their expertise to give Australians real ownership of their gas and ensure that it is Australia that receives the benefits. That's the difference between One Nation and the socialists across the chamber. We don't sell false promises and blatant lies that will deliver disastrous outcomes. The Greens are never held to account. They only deliver fear, lies and false promises. We come with real-world solutions for the future of Australia, and we're the only ones to do that. One Nation will deliver for the people of this nation.

David Shoebridge (NSW, Australian Greens) | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, here you get it, don't you? You've got the three gas parties with their billionaire donors all lining up together. One Nation, Labor and what's left of the coalition are all joining together to oppose a gas export tax on their big billionaire donor mates. This tells the truth. If there were a cat wandering through the chamber, it'd have a bloody big bell on it, and it would be ringing in the donations that the gas industry has given to the Liberals, to One Nation and, of course, to their mates in the Labor Party.

What could taxing big gas deliver for us? Well, with the tax we'd get from big gas, you wouldn't have to be cutting 160,000 vulnerable Australians off the NDIS, because we'd have the revenue to actually put money into the care sector and the care economy. This government, the Labor Albanese government, with help and support from their One Nation mates, are going to say they're not going to tax these billionaire owners of gas exports, because they care more for a handful of billionaires than they do for over 150,000 Australians and their families who desperately need the support of the NDIS. You could have met any shortfall in the NDIS a couple of times over by taxing export gas. We could ensure that every Australian could just walk in to a GP clinic and get the treatment they need right there and then for free with that money.

But Labor has decided, with their mates in One Nation and the sort of quiet little cheer squad in the coalition—you could have had the money to make that happen if you'd been willing to take on the one per cent and the billionaire class and tax gas exports. We're asking here for about a third—a bit less than a third—of what Norway does in taxing gas exports. You'd have billions of dollars a year. The fact that Labor won't do it now while these gas export companies are literally making blood soaked super profits because of Trump's war in Iran shows the reality.

We're not going to fix Labor. Australians need to see what's happening and replace Labor with parties that are going to take on the billionaires, not fly around in one of their gifted aeroplanes or wander off to some Sicilian resort with the billionaire class. That's who you need. Look at what's happening here. Look at what's happening here, and you can see it.

I want to thank my colleague Senator Hodgins-May for the leadership that she's shown in this, the strength that she's shown not only chairing that committee but also holding this government to account like she's doing today. More of that.

Mehreen Faruqi (NSW, Australian Greens) | Link to this | Hansard source

Are you coming to the Prime Minister's 118th birthday? It's going to be a big day. As well as celebrating making it all the way to 2081, he will finally get to mark the closure of gas wells he approved while Prime Minister more than five and a half decades earlier—all 1,695 of them. These wells are just one of the 36 new and expanded coal, oil and gas projects the Albanese government has approved—new projects harming the planet, harming the environment and health for decades to come.

I've got some investment advice so good that you'll think this clip is an AI scam. Here's what to do: first, be a big gas corporation. Then drop some cash into Labor's election accounts—$100,000 or so will do. In return, Labor will let you make billions and get away with exporting over half of Australia's gas without paying a cent in royalties. In fact, this government collects more money slugging you with student debt than these big gas companies pay in tax. And when the Greens, who don't take a single cent of these dirty donations, sided with Australians, saying we should have a minimum 25 per cent export tax on gas revenue, Labor chose to side with the billionaires. Seriously!

Polluting gas corporations love Labor in the same way that Gina loves One Nation. If you're sick of Labor working for their donors instead of you, now is the time to stick it to them and join the Greens. Together we are capable of massive change. Join us and help make this happen.

Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that Senator McKim's motion, as moved by Senator Hodgins-May, be agreed to.