Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

What we have established is that, if there was double dipping before, then there will still be double dipping afterwards—that is, if we want to call it double dipping. It was called the production grant. We have already confirmed that, because even the people in this room are referring to it as the production grant. If there was double dipping before, there will be double dipping afterwards. You are only allowed to have double dipping afterwards if five per cent of your fuel is a biorenewable component and the other 95 per cent is mineral based. So what was there before will be there afterwards.

We have it thrown up by Treasury that it is going to cost $1½ billion. If all the biodiesel that can be produced—and I think there is a limit on how much can be produced—is to be consumed in B5, or five per cent biodiesel, that means that the scenario of this huge loss from B49 will still be there, only this time it will be covered up because it will be under the standard diesel. There is the same potential loss either way. What was there before will be there afterwards, only in a smaller portion. But, if it happens in the larger total amount, the net result is the same. All that is really going to change is who is getting the benefit of this.

I would like to ask about a second issue because I am curious—and I understand if you take this on notice as I appreciate how difficult this issue is. How much biodiesel is currently being produced? I have been told 70 million litres, someone has said 40 million and someone else has said 10 million. If it is 10 million or 40 million litres at 38c a litre, we are really only looking at around a $16 million loss to the government. It is hardly quantum mechanics.