Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry) Share this | Hansard source

What I would say to the shadow Treasurer is he has not even attempted to address the substance of the argument that he put forward in this MPI. The member for McMahon has come in here and tried to deliver a lecture about the cost of living. But not once did I hear him raise the carbon tax nor apologise for a carbon tax that delivered a cost impost of $550. The increase to fuel excise needs to be taken into a level of understanding and reality.

In 2001, the level of excise was capped at 38.14c, which was 42 per cent of the price of fuel. Today in 2014, the excise is 25 per cent. The cost increase that will come in on 10 November is 0.0046c. What people are telling me they are more concerned with is the fluctuation in fuel prices at the bowser. And a report that I have pulled down shows a weekly fluctuation in fuel prices across capital cities of 6.4c in one week. In Brisbane it was 11.3c; in Sydney it was 12.2c; in Melbourne, 11.5c; in Adelaide, 10.9c; in Perth, 8.7c, in Hobart, 3c; on the Gold Coast, 16c; on the Sunshine Coast, 7.7c; in Darwin, 17.2c; and in Canberra, 3c. That is just one week's fuel price fluctuation. And we are talking about less than half a cent per litre.

The reality is that this increase will be hypothecated so that all of the money raised will actually go into road infrastructure. It is not like taxes that the former government introduced that were just consumed into consolidated revenue. Being lectured on the cost-of-living increases by the member for McMahon is dishonest in itself. He uses the word 'dishonest' regularly, but it is dishonest in itself. No. 1, he has not apologised for the carbon tax that he voted to support and which he is lining up to reintroduce into the cost-of-living standard for each and every person. The reality is that we will spend every cent of this $2.2 billion on road infrastructure, plus more. In fact, in 2016-17 our spend on infrastructure will be around $8.7 billion in one year alone—$8.7 billion!

Such is the dishonesty of the campaign from the Labor opposition that it has actually flowed through to people in the community. I will quote from an article by Steven Scott in The Courier-Mail today where it says:

Carseldine resident Sonia Sahota, 22, says the price of fuel is "high enough as it is".

Well, I can understand that. The article continues:

The plan will see the fuel excise rise by half a cent—

That is correct—

to 38.6c per litre on November 10.

Then she goes on in the article:

… the current cost of petrol already placed pressure on her weekly budget.

Well, nothing like the carbon tax. The article continued:

The student estimated it cost her $50 to fill up and said she wouldn't support paying an extra two dollars in tax to fill up.

Well, $50 worth of fuel is around 33—let's say 35—litres, which will cost 26c extra to fill up, not $2.

So the carry-on by the Labor opposition about the massive cost increases needs to be brought into perspective. As I said, in 2001, when excise was capped, it was 42 per cent of the price of fuel. Today, because there have been no CPI increases, it sits at a margin of 25 per cent. That is because the price of fuel has increased—massively increased. But as I said, what we need to do is make sure that this measure, which will in part go down to helping pay for the road infrastructure, is committed to do that. And it will be done if the opposition supports it. By bringing this into a tariff measure it has 12 months to be put to the chamber to be voted upon.

This is not without precedent. I sat in this chamber and watch the alcopops debate. That money was not hypothecated for all of it the to go into health—most of it went into consolidated revenue.

See this speech in context