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

I move amendment (2) on sheet 5045:

(2)    Schedule 2, page 4 (after line 13), at the end of the Schedule, add:

4  Section 95A (at the end of the definition of goods)

Add:

      ; and (f)     petroleum products.

Obviously, the Trade Practices Act has to have the power of review to be able to monitor what is going on in the pricing structure. We have just had Senator Fielding’s amendment. The reason I supported it is that, although it is clumsy, at least it gives us a starting position. I think we can do something better than that—and I think amendment (2) is something better than that. My amendment provides a monitoring ability in the Trade Practices Act. It puts in place some sense of belief in a commercial-in-confidence arrangement to look at fuel pricing. It is an addendum which adds petroleum products to a number of other things that are in section 95A of the Trade Practices Act. Obviously, there is our belief in the ability of the Trade Practices Act to have surveillance over a whole range of products. Why can’t we include petroleum products? We have made the statement in legislation that there are a range of other products that deserve the ability to be monitored, and I think petroleum products should be amongst them. It is a minor amendment.

Although I supported Senator Fielding’s amendment, the problem I have with it is that it shows everybody’s underwear, although at least it gets the ball rolling. If that amendment had been successful, I would certainly have supported a watering down to an independent ombudsman. But it might have been the only chance we had, so I supported it to at least get the ball rolling. This amendment gives a better process to something that is already in place and that the government is happy with. We already have Trade Practices Act monitoring of products in place, and this amendment adds petroleum products to the list of products.

I respect what the minister said about the previous amendment. Although I agree with the sentiment of a vast amount of what he said, we had to start somewhere; we had to get the debate to a point where we acknowledged that the terminal gate price is not transparent. Having everybody know the terminal gate price is of no real assistance, because the discounting mechanism is where the game is at. We have to have in place a mechanism that at least allows some sort of power of review, power of commentary, and the ability to look at what is happening, especially with regard to independents—and we have gone through why independents are so important.

First and foremost, the Trade Practices Act protects the manifest right of the Australian public to go into business at ground level—and that is a strong belief of anybody on the conservative side of government. It protects independents, who lead in price discounting and are absolutely instrumental in getting biorenewables out into the market. We know that. It gives people in small business the latitude to be master of their own ship, to be master of their own thoughts, to follow their own destiny, to properly connect themselves to the wealth of their own nation and to have a higher sense of freedom. When asked what they want out of their work, 95 per cent of people come out with a clear statement that one day they want to be their own boss. A lot of them never get there but they all have that desire. I hope that has been plumbed on this side of the chamber and that we can give people that freedom and that innate sense that one day they will be master of their own ship. We need to protect the mechanism of people going into business, and the addition of petroleum products to section 95A of the Trade Practices Act will allow that to happen. It will be fascinating to listen to the debate. I hope that such a minor amendment can gather some support.