HANSARD EXTRACT
|
Ministerial Statements: Energy Initiatives |
| 17 August 2006 |
Mr HAYES
(Werriwa) (11.43 a.m.)—You
only need to pick up a newspaper these days, listen to a local
radio, watch the nightly news perhaps or, quite frankly, have a
conversation with anyone in an electorate—as you would no doubt
appreciate yourself, Mr Deputy Speaker—to find that the first thing
people want to talk about is petrol prices. Conversations on petrol
pricing have replaced those about the weather or property prices.
Whether you are sitting around at the football match, at the club
after the game or doing anything else petrol prices are not far from
people’s minds. Certainly that has been the experience in my
electorate, and I think if everyone were being factual around the
chamber that would be their experience as well. I first raised the
issue of petrol prices in this country in August last year. Given
the fact that I was sworn in as a member of parliament only in late
May, it did not take long for people in my area, throughout
Liverpool and Campbelltown, to make it known to me that the issues
that concerned them were the uncertainties associated with rising
petrol prices.
As a representative of an outer metropolitan
electorate, I appreciate that thousands of people who get in their
cars each day and head off to work face the rapid increase in petrol
prices. Hence the reason it is of concern to most people. For
instance, within the electorate of Werriwa, which consists largely
of working families, people are using their vehicles to get to and
from work and to get kids to and from school, as well as the many
associated school activities that would follow.
To give you some understanding from my
perspective as it impacts on my electorate, you only need to have a
cursory look at the actual figures involved. The fact is that half
the households in the electorate of Werriwa have two or more
vehicles, while two-thirds of the people in my electorate use their
vehicles to travel to work. That being the case, you will appreciate
the enormous impact of rising petrol prices on the family budget. It
is no wonder even a small rise in petrol prices constitutes a
serious issue for people in my electorate, where they have to
reassess their family budgets and start to think about what they are
going to have to cut back—perhaps it is to cut back on out-of-school
activities for kids; there may be issues about sports et cetera—and
also how they are going to manage the family budget to do everything
else, including paying their mortgage. As you would appreciate,
outer metropolitan
Sydney is the mortgage belt of
Sydney.
Given the circumstances of so many of my
constituents, it was with considerable interest that I listened to
the content of the Prime Minister’s statement on Monday, which is
the subject of our discussion here today. I listened with great
interest, and I have to say I was disappointed. I was disappointed
because I thought it was only designed to address short-term issues.
It was not designed to actually give this country energy security
for the future and protect against the long-term ravages of a
dependency on foreign crude oil supply.
As you would no doubt appreciate, it did take
less than a three-hour meeting of the Prime Minister’s backbench to
hear just how the skyrocketing petrol prices were hurting
people—Australian families and small businesses. So, when the Prime
Minister got proudly to his feet on Monday and delivered one of his
very few ministerial statements, I have to say it was somewhat
disappointing in terms of the content. It was disappointing because
it was another effort as a political quick fix. It did not deal with
the issue of what is looming large on the horizon of the economies
throughout the world or the impact that rising petrol or fuel prices
will have on the Australian economy while we are dependent on
foreign oil supply, and, quite frankly, it did little to show that
we had a plan to protect Australian consumers from having to compete
with the emerging and energy-hungry economies of China and
India—steps that would have allowed Australia to develop a
diversified and home-grown fuel industry. To put in place the steps,
we on our side have actually looked at those and, as you would
recall, Mr Deputy Speaker Scott, because I think most government
members do—they read the Labor Party’s blueprints—in October last
year we released our blueprint on fuel.
Relief at the petrol pump is one aspect of the
issues associated with transport fuels and the energy debate. This
is a matter that I spoke about on a number of occasions. As a matter
of fact, I sought to have a reference to the ACCC so that that body
could examine domestic petrol pricing, a measure that this
government opposed, even to the point of gagging the motion that I
was moving at that stage. There is no doubt that in the immediate
term the most pressing issue for most motorists and small businesses
is petrol pricing and that is why the Labor Party sought a reference
to the ACCC whereby it could examine in detail all aspects of
domestic petrol pricing to ensure, at least for the purpose of
Australian motorists, that there was some transparency in the
pricing at the petrol pump.
However, the second and probably most important
aspect associated with the transport fuels and energy debate is
long-term energy security. If this government continues to thumb its
nose at putting in place steps to address the longer term
implications of increased demand for oil and the limited growth of
supply, that cry of pain from the populace will only grow louder and
the impact will be felt more acutely on the household budgets of
families and small businesses.
I have raised the issue of petrol prices and
the need for forward planning for
Australia’s long-term energy security in the parliament on at least
a dozen occasions. I might add that on the last occasion on which I
sought to do that I was gagged by the government in trying to have a
reference to the ACCC. Can you believe that? The government does not
want to hear about the experience of the people of south-western
Sydney, and I imagine that that is the case for people from working
families in all outer metropolitan areas. In contrast, we have been
listening.
I certainly did take this on board when I
listened intently to what the Prime Minister had to say the other
day. Labor was looking in the Prime Minister’s statement for a sign
that the government had a plan for the future, but all we heard in
this marquee announcement was that subsidies would be introduced to
convert motor vehicles to LPG and that petrol stations could access
subsidies to install ethanol tanks, but this government still has
not been able to tell us how many people will be able to take
advantage of these subsidies. It cannot tell us how many motorists
will be able to benefit from the LPG subsidies. I know that the
member for
Hunter estimates in his calculations that approximately only three
per cent of motorists will be able to take up the advantages of that
scheme. If that is right, that means that 97 per cent of people will
be left disappointed with this marquee initiative announced by the
Prime Minister.
I mentioned earlier that the Prime Minister’s
statement contained very little vision for meeting Australia’s
future energy demand—be they transport fuels or any other energy
form in that regard. There was too little in the measures to
uncouple from our dependency on overseas oil supply. By contrast,
Labor has already developed and released its plans for the future.
While the government concentrates on energies and propping up the
nuclear power debate, Labor has called for a full examination of all
options available to us, including wind, solar, biofuels, clean
burning coal and others. It is not enough to simply concentrate on
one aspect of energy for securing
Australia’s
energy future.
I found it particularly interesting that on the
day that the Prime Minister delivered his much awaited statement,
the Australian newspaper ran an editorial that showed that at
least some people are concerned about
Australia’s
long-term energy interests. In its editorial on Monday, the
Australian newspaper said this:
...
Australia
has the capacity to break its dependence on imported crude oil. But
this will not be done by political posturing and bandaid solutions.
In other words, this will not be done by this government. The
Australian went on to say:
Australia
must seize the opportunity of a high world oil price to finally get
serious about its long-term energy future.
It went on to say:
Opposition resources spokesman
Martin
Ferguson has raised the issue of gas or coal to liquids as the best
long-term answer to the current oil price shock, and he is correct.
That is a telling comment coming from the Australian
newspaper, that has taken it upon itself to look at what is
motivating its readers and, in turn, protect them from the oil shock
and acknowledge that the development of technologies in gas and coal
to liquids is in
Australia’s best long-term interest.
Unlike the government’s attempt at the
short-term political fix, Labor plans for the future. Labor’s fuels
blueprint sets the goal of reducing our reliance on foreign oil and
outlining a need to diversify Australian fuel industries. Labor has
identified that it will pursue self-sufficiency to make this nation
stronger, to insulate it from the ravages of the market, to protect
it from the economic forces of supply and demand on the world stage,
which interact to drive up oil prices. Labor is looking after the
strategic interests of Australian fuel security.
In contrast to the government’s marquee
announcement about LPG conversions, subsidies will not be available
to all motorists. We saw
Mr
Nairn acknowledge the other day that we will not be moving to
convert Commonwealth vehicles to LPG because of the limitations that
the gas fuel provides presently. And bear in mind that he made his
statement in July this year and then tried to tell us all that much
has changed since July. The only thing that has changed since July
is that the Prime Minister got up on Monday and made a statement
about it. The Prime Minister’s announcement is likely to do little
more than drive up the price of LPG conversions and LPG fuel by
increasing demand. Labor’s plan, quite frankly, is to provide
incentives for Australians to be able to buy and run their vehicles
on alternative fuels.
In addition to making a serious effort in
diversifying Australia’s fuel industry and reducing the reliance on
imported crude oil, Labor is committed to making alternative fuel
vehicles tariff free, cutting up to $2,000 off the price of the
current hybrid vehicles, and working with state and local
governments to give city traffic and parking advantages to hybrid
vehicles. A Labor government would also conduct feasibility studies
into gas-to-liquid plans as well as coal-to-liquid plans, offer
petroleum resource rent tax incentives for the developers of gas
fuels which provide resources for gas to liquids within their
project, examine the infrastructure investment allowance for
investment in Australian gas-to-liquid infrastructure, develop a
targeted fund scheme for research and development in these areas,
work with industry to improve engine design and fuel quality
standards, ease the regulation on biofuel products on farms, and
encourage a sustainable ethanol industry. (Time expired)
Return
to Speeches Menu.
