Martin Ferguson (Batman, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Primary Industries, Resources, Forestry and Tourism) Share this | Hansard source

As is evidenced by the participation on this side of the House, we regard this debate as exceptionally important. I will tell you why. I think this debate reflects sadly on the government’s performance generally. The basis of the Petroleum Retail Legislation Repeal Bill 2006 is to reflect a new legislative regime in response to what we all believe is a major change in the structure of the Australian retail petroleum industry. The view of the whole parliament was that we required legislation, because we had an understanding that the new structure of the petroleum industry in Australia was out of step with the legislative framework. It was our view that the legislative framework potentially created a subcompetitive retail environment, as the Minister for Industry, Tourism and Resources said in his second reading speech, which potentially imposed higher costs on Australian industry and consumers. That is important at the moment because it is at a time of record high oil prices. We all appreciate that there is no immediate solution to the issue of record high oil prices because of a variety of factors, including a huge demand in developing countries such as China, with India yet to come on stream.

I am therefore utterly amazed that, given that on Monday this week the Prime Minister saw fit to make a prime ministerial statement to the Australian community—not just to the Australian parliament but to the Australian community—on the issue of energy, with a special focus on transport fuels and that statement went to a total of 23 pages. It dealt with a range of new options, such as an appropriate government focus on trying to spread the use of LPG in the Australian motoring community—and another push, can I say in response to the member for New England, for the ethanol and biofuels industry.

Unfortunately, in terms of the ethanol industry, there is no capacity for government to direct sugar producers in Australia to turn their sugar production towards ethanol and thereby receive a lower price than they are receiving internationally at the moment for the sale of their sugar. In some ways, some issues in Australia are driven by market forces. I would have thought that the member for New England would have understood them, because he prides himself on representing the private sector in the Australian community.

But—having said that—this is a key debate. I would have thought that, given the nature of this legislation, in association with the Prime Minister’s major statement to the Australian community about transport fuel in Australia, there would be some interest in this debate on the government side of the House. I raise this very seriously, because there is no doubt in my mind that, over the next couple of weeks, in all the coalition seats around Australia, all of a sudden, glossy publications will appear in the Australian householder’s letterbox or alternatively in the local newspapers.

It is interesting to note, in terms of that self-promotion out in the Australian community, that all of a sudden we received an email from the Special Minister of State last night, saying, ‘Government has now resolved that you haven’t got enough to spend on publications.’ With no justification, our publications allowance has been increased overnight from $125,000 per annum for each seat in Australia to $150,000 per annum, with a carryover of roughly 45 per cent in an election year, effectively meaning that in an election year you will have over $200,000 per year of taxpayers’ money to spend on promoting your re-election.

Rather than spending their time sitting in their offices over the last couple of days preparing those publications, which are provided by a government media unit to circulate throughout the whole Australian community at taxpayers’ expense, I would have thought that government members could have found some time to come into the House to debate this major legislation and also to express their views about the appropriateness of the Prime Minister’s ministerial statement on Monday on transport fuels.

See this speech in context