Christine Milne (Tasmania, Australian Greens) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I apologise to the Senate for missing my place in the speakers queue. I would just like to congratulate Senator Joyce for the effort and research that he has put into this disallowance motion. The Greens support the position that he has put, and we do so for a number of reasons. The first one, which is highly significant, is in terms of procedure. It is totally inappropriate parliamentary procedure to bring in regulations before the parliament has had a chance to deal with the legislation that will govern petroleum retail into the future. It is bad process.

It was interesting to me that, in the energy efficiency opportunities consultation process, big business—the 200 largest energy users in the country—were not prepared to see the legislation come into the parliament until they had seen the regulations. But here, when the boot is on the other foot, big business is very happy to see the regulation come in before there has been any debate on the principle concerning the repeal bills and the proposed oil code. I am not prepared to do that. I think it is grossly unfair to small business in this country that we would have a situation where regulations pre-empt the decision of the parliament, because nobody can know at this point what the decision of the parliament is going to be. Secondly, the effect of this regulation would be to remove the four major oil companies from the provisions of the Petroleum Retail Marketing Sites Act, as I indicated, before the legislation and regulations are in. I understand why they want to do it. I understand that the entry of the supermarkets has created a perverse effect with regard to the petroleum retail industry. But that is not an excuse for dealing with the situation in this way.

The Greens will consider the repeal bill and the proposed oil code in the future provided that the government strengthens section 46 of the Trade Practices Act so that there is clear evidence of the way in which the government intends to protect small and independent retailers. We certainly take the point that, as Senator Joyce has outlined and as the Motor Trades Association has said, the service station operators looking at the proposed code as it now stands believe it is defective because it will not ensure a level playing field allowing small service station operators to be able to compete fairly in the market with the large supermarkets and oil companies.

Finally, I support Senator Joyce’s interest in maintaining a distribution network for alternative fuels into the future. He is right in saying that independent operators are our best hope in that regard. We know that 61 per cent of greenhouse gases are generated from the transport sector. I think there is a very important role for alternative fuels to play, not only in rural regeneration and jobs but in meeting our greenhouse gas emission targets. I am as keen as anyone to see a distribution network maintain jobs in rural areas and for small businesses to maintain their position in the market.

To that end, the Greens support the disallowance. As I indicated, we will consider the repeal bill and the proposed oil code into the future, because we certainly do not like the fact that the supermarkets have 73 per cent of the market. The situation as it is is unsatisfactory. We do want to support small business. We do want to support the roll-out of alternative fuels. We want to make sure that fairness is the principle that operates and not just effective competition for the majors in the retail petroleum trade.