Annette Ellis (Canberra, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on the Petroleum Retail Legislation Repeal Bill 2006 and support the member for Batman and my colleagues on the amendments to this bill. It is disappointing that only one government backbencher is speaking on this bill. As this is a vital issue at a time when petrol prices are soaring, I cannot interpret that as other than an indicator of the growing arrogance within government ranks.

This bill is very timely. People in my electorate and across Australia are struggling with soaring petrol prices, interest rate increases and more uncertainty in the workplace. People are now spending a higher proportion of their income on mortgage payments than ever before. At the last election the Prime Minister promised to keep interest rates low, but people are now realising the hollowness of that promise. People now spend 11 per cent of household disposable income on mortgages, compared to 9.3 per cent when interest rates peaked in 1989. So those families in my electorate who are paying off a mortgage are hurting much more now than they did in the past.

The recent rate rise will hurt everyone with a mortgage, but there are some who will be hurt more than others. In some suburbs in my community more than half the private homes are paying off a mortgage—62 per cent in Banks, 61 per cent in Conder, 55 per cent in Gordon, 53 per cent in Calwell, 52 per cent in Macarthur and 51 per cent in Theodore. I name those suburbs on purpose, because they are outer suburbs. As these people live in outer suburbs, chances are they have to travel more than many others to get around the town, and high petrol costs are going to make their lives a lot more difficult. The majority of these people are young families for whom every dollar of disposable income counts, and the impact of fuel prices is really beginning to bite.

People in the outer suburbs rely on their cars to take their kids to school, to take family members or friends to medical appointments, to go shopping, to visit family, to get to work and to get their children to recreational activities at weekends. I am concerned about the financial stress these high petrol prices are placing on those types of families within my community.

The bill we are debating today is a belated response to the problem of spiralling petrol prices. It will repeal the sites act and franchises act, which are now out of date and ineffective because of structural changes in the petroleum retail sector. The entry of supermarket chains into the petrol market, and their market strength, has changed the nature of the retail petrol sector, but the legislation has not kept up with these changes. As the previous speaker, the member for Lowe, said, it is interesting that the regulatory regime has been in place for decades while the marketplace has changed so dramatically, with two very big players—Woolworths and Coles—having an enormous role in those market changes. I cannot help but think of the many independent owners in the petrol business who have gone out of the marketplace during those years. It is of some concern when you think about the impact.

As a result, the different types of retail participants are subject to different protections and regulatory requirements. Unfortunately, the current legislation favours some retailers more than others. As I said, when I reflect on the past and the changes that have come with the big players as against the small, that really does ring true. This bill will ensure that all market participants can compete on equal terms. Once the current legislation is repealed, a new regulation, the Trade Practices (Industry Codes-Oilcode) Regulations 2005, will be introduced. This will put all retailers on a level playing field. The Oilcode will bring the supermarket chains under a mandatory industry code of practice for the first time.

I am pleased that this bill has the support of the overwhelming majority of market retailers, motorists and the peak bodies that represent them. I support this bill. However, it is a shame that the government ignored Labor’s proposal seven years ago to strengthen the Trade Practices Act and repeal the acts. Unfortunately, the government is still ignoring this important aspect. That is why I support the amendments proposed by the member for Batman. These amendments will strengthen the Trade Practices Act to develop a comprehensive approach to petrol retail pricing and provide greater scope for dealing with market power abuse. This will further protect small business. These amendments were recommended by the 2003 Dawson inquiry and by the 2004 Senate recommendations for reform, but the government continues to ignore those recommendations.

There are several measures the government could take to address the rising cost of petrol. The ACCC should have greater powers to formally monitor petrol prices and to demand information from oil companies and retailers. The community wants nothing more, or less, than that. The government should reduce our dependency on foreign oil. Labor has a plan to do this and policies to encourage alternative energy use. Labor has proposed the following measures: finding more gas and oil in Australia; making alternative fuel vehicles tariff free; cutting up to $2,000 from the price of current hybrid cars; granting tax rebates for converting petrol cars to LPG; and conducting a feasibility study into gas to liquid fuels plants in Australia—which, as we have heard in the last couple of days, the Prime Minister is now happy to consider.

In our amendments to this bill, Labor calls on the government to require the Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources to report to the parliament annually on measures taken and the progress made to: firstly, increase market penetration of ethanol and biodiesel, LPG and CNG, including the number and location of service stations and the names of the companies offering these products on their retail sites; secondly, secure new investment in biofuel, LPG and CNG production and supply infrastructure in Australia; and, thirdly, secure investment in new alternative transport fuel industries in Australia, including gas and coal to liquids.

The Prime Minister claims there is nothing he can do to control the soaring petrol prices, but clearly that is not the case completely. Labor has a comprehensive approach, outlined in our amendments to this bill and in Labor’s fuels blueprint, which we believe will make a difference.

The other point I want to make in general terms is on technology in this country. We are always pretty good at developing good technology. I have no doubt on that. I know that it exists, that car manufacturers both here and overseas have developed vehicles and technology that could begin to answer a lot of the questions that we have in relation to the cost of fuel. We need to look at that technology, and not only for the sake of the cost of fuel.

The driving impetus for these things has been the environment. Long before we were talking about the price of petrol, we were talking about the need to do something about this, technologically, for the sake of the environment. I am not for one moment saying that one is more important than the other; we really need to consider both. I would like to think that the government could bring to bear more pressure than it has to date, or could increase the pressure and the influence it already has on car manufacturers to talk about real alternatives: future hybrid cars and other future alternatives which would answer not only, to a great degree, the fuel question but also the environment question attached to this whole debate. In closing, I endorse entirely the words of and the amendments moved by the member for Batman and hope that we will see a change in the future on this whole question of fuel in Australia.

See this speech in context