Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I join with the member for Corio in condemning the federal government for its failure to develop an adequate and proper policy, a policy that looks to the future in this area. Unfortunately, we in this House find ourselves reacting to just about every issue, because that is the way this government works. Unfortunately for the people of Australia, I do not think it has reacted soon enough to the need to look at reforms to fuel tax and to look at alternative sources of energy. Australia as a nation will pay for the failure of the Howard government.

The Fuel Tax Bill 2006 and cognate bill constitute major reform to fuel taxation in Australia. They provide for a single system of fuel tax and associated credits. They also include measures for reductions in the incidence of fuel tax levied on taxable fuels; staged introduction of a framework for the taxation of liquefied petroleum gas, liquefied natural gas and compressed natural gas; from 1 July 2011 staged reduction in tax assistance for biodiesel and domestic ethanol; and the linkage of fuel credits to environmental standards. We will be supporting much of what the government has included in these bills, but we do not support the government’s ineptitude and its failure to address the real issues that are facing the people of Australia.

The proposed changes consolidate measures into a single fuel tax, which is a good idea. It is good policy, it makes it easier, simpler, and it does this with credits achieved through the BAS reporting systems. Many users will effectively receive the same level of tax under different administration arrangements, but some users will face significant tax reductions. There will be a higher tax for some on-road use. Aviation fuels are excluded from the fuel tax.

It is my understanding that the way the government is linking it to the BAS will cause some problems. The Australian Tax Office is notoriously slow in returning moneys and dealing with matters that are sent to it. My office is constantly deluged with problems constituents have with the ATO, including that of facing delays—although that is currently not a problem. As to the administration of the fuel tax credits regime, it will be claimed on the BAS in the same way as input tax credits are claimed for GST. Because of these delays, there is the potential to cause major cash flow problems for medium-sized producers. These producers are effectively fuel tax free due to the remission certificates for excise and customs on fuel input. Now they must pay the fuel tax and get the credit when they lodge their BAS. Producers with a turnover of $20 million must report monthly for GST purposes. I have been arguing that GST refunds are not provided quickly. Businesses with $2 million to $20 million turnovers report quarterly and thus face major delays between payment of the tax and the associated credit. This can cause cash flow problems.

That is from the business perspective. I would like to turn to the amendment moved by the shadow minister, the member for Hunter. The first part of the amendment deals with the failure of the government to address issues around petrol prices. The people of Australia have been dealt a double whammy of soaring petrol prices and increased interest rates, with two interest rate rises since the last election. What has the government done to deal with these petrol and fuel price increases? I argue they have done very little. The Prime Minister has said there is not much he can do. He has given up. He has put it in the too-hard basket. Those people who rely on the government to solve problems, those people who rely on being able to purchase affordable fuel, should expect a little bit more from their Prime Minister than saying, ‘It’s too hard; I don’t know what I’ll do about it.’

The people of Australia think that something should happen. I refer to a letter I have here from a constituent, Mr Jack Cambourn of Chain Valley Bay. He wrote this letter to me just after the Easter break. He pointed out that the public’s attention is always focused on the price of petrol and the way the price of fuel increases around a holiday break. He was referring to Easter, but I note that within my electorate, prior to the long weekend, the price of petrol was $1.49. Today it has dropped down to $1.42. This is the phenomenon that Mr Cambourn was referring to in the letter he wrote to me. He said:

Fuel costs are passed on to the people in every item they buy in the super market.

I think that is an important factor. When we are in there buying our fruit and vegetables, we must be aware that the high prices we are paying for them are a direct result of the Howard government not acting to constrain the price of fuel or to look at alternative fuels. He goes on to say:

Those who do not own a vehicle pay, but clearly the vehicle owner pays twice, once at the service station, and again at the super market.

He goes on to ask:

Do we have to go on paying?

He said:

The Prime Minister was on the Tele recently discussing the problem of increasing prices of motor fuel. “There’s nothing we can do about it” says the PM.

As I mentioned earlier, he threw his hands in the air, abrogated his responsibility and said, ‘There’s nothing I can do about it.’ Mr Cambourn continued:

Immediately a scene appeared on the screen showing a mass of people on the floor of the New York stock exchange. We were told they were stockbrokers bidding for stock in oil companies.

He goes on to make the point that this activity can have an effect on world oil prices. He says:

There are 65 countries around the world who possess natural deposits of crude oil, Australia is one. Some are known to sell motor fuel into their domestic market at a lower price than they would sell it into their export market, but not Australia.

The USA is one, Venezuela is another. Within the past three months the US was selling motor fuel for $US2.80 a gallon.

He goes on to talk about converting these prices to Australian dollars. He went on to say they were much lower—less than half the price that we are paying now. He goes on to argue that the Howard government should look at things a lot more creatively. He then goes on to say that it is up to federal members of parliament to try to resolve the problems of all those families whose interests we have been elected to this parliament to support and to look after.

Another constituent who has been very active in community groups and does a lot of volunteer work is now unable to do so because of the increase in the price of petrol. Parents are telling me that they are no longer able to take their children to those sporting activities that they have been involved in for a very long time. As with other things, that is a double-edged sword because it impacts on the health of our young people, which in turn can lead to an increase in obesity and health problems into the future and which increases costs to government—all because the government has failed to look at the issue of petrol prices.

Floraville Public School, in my electorate, is a lot more far-sighted than members of this government. Last week students from Floraville Public School interviewed me on the telephone. They asked me about ethanol and alternative fuels. They asked me whether I supported their use. They asked me about the sorts of policies the government should be introducing and how the government could address the issues and look at alternative fuels. I gave an answer from my perspective—as a Labor Party opposition member of this parliament who can see that this government’s inactivity is costing Australia in a big way. The students will write a report in their school newspaper that will detail whether they think that what I support is a much better alternative than what the government has done—which is nothing.

The abolition of the Fuel Sales Grants Scheme will mean an increase in costs to regional areas. There is no way the government can walk away from that. Once again, the government have handled that very badly. They have not looked at the impact of their decision. The government should read the article that the students of Floraville Public School put in their newspaper about ways of reducing Australia’s dependency on foreign oil and developing an Australian solution—that is, an Australian fuel industry. I do not think there is any better example of what could be done than that which has been set out in the Leader of the Opposition’s blueprint for Australian fuels, ‘Developing the Australian fuel industry’.

The Leader of the Opposition highlights the fact that we need to develop a diversified Australian fuel industry and become a more fuel self-sufficient nation which is not dependent on a very volatile oil market and overseas market, which is not open to manipulation by foreign countries and foreign variables and which has a policy that is Australian based. Australian families have been struggling with the increase in fuel prices. Members may have seen that advertisement on television for an insurance company, where the father adds up how much it costs and gives the young boy in the back seat of the car a bill for taking him to school that reflects the increase in the price of petrol. The insurance company offers another solution, but I think the solution is to develop an Australian industry.

I firmly believe the way forward for transport fuels in Australia is to have Australia stand on its own two feet rather than sit there waiting for overseas factors and influences to determine how much we pay for petrol at the bowsers. It is also important that we look at the relationships between the oil companies. For too long the market here in Australia has been manipulated. As I highlighted earlier, the cost of fuel before Easter and before the long weekend just gone was manipulated by the oil companies. I do not see how we could be asked to pay $1.49 on Friday and $1.42 today.

See this speech in context