Andrew Leigh
Fenner · Australian Labor Party · Australia
“I move: That, in accordance with the provisions of the Public Works Committee Act 1969 , it is expedient to carry out the following proposed work which was referred to the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works and on which the committee has duly reported to Parliament: Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation—Deco…”
“The proposed works were referred to the public works committee on 3 March 2026. Following its inquiry, the committee has recommended that the House of Representatives resolve that it is expedient to carry out the proposed works.”
“When the Leader of the Opposition became leader, getting rid of the first woman to head the Liberal Party, he said that his party needed to 'change or die'. I don't think many Australians thought that they were going to choose door 2, but that's what's happening right now. The modern Liberal Party won't change, and it's choosing to die.”
“From today, Labor is putting in place six months of paid parental leave. But the shadow treasurer has called paid parental leave 'a very bad scheme', saying: … that is not my choice that women have children; it's not. It's genetic. From today, Labor is delivering tax cuts for every working Australian.”
“But when asked the same question, the Leader of the Opposition said things like, 'I don't quite know what you mean by that question,' and, 'Do you want to define it for me?' and, 'There's all these vague words running around.' Asked seven times, he couldn't back in multiculturalism.”
“For small business, we've changed the R&D tax credit so that every dollar of R&D tax credit drives 20 per cent more research and development. For Australians who are looking to afford medicines, the health minister has been putting a record number of drugs through the PBS and driving record funding through our hospital system.”
The complete record
Every one of 364 lines we hold for Andrew Leigh, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 8.
“My maternal grandfather, Roly Stebbins, was born in a tent in 1922. His dad was a veteran who'd fought in World War I, and his dad could never afford a home of his own; he never owned a home. During the Great Depression, my grandfather left school at age 14 to support the family and then worked as a boilermaker. It was only after World War II that he was able to afford to buy a home of his own. He got a block of land in Seaholme, near Williamstown, and he and mates worked together to fire the bricks. He and my grandmother, Jean Stebbins, raised four kids in a home they built themselves. My grandparent's story was the story of Australia in that period.”
“We've put in place a host of positive reforms to support charities: ensuring that we don't have gag clauses and that we celebrate the role of charities in public advocacy; creating a new community charity category; streamlining the deductible gift recipient system by returning four key categories to the tax office; putting in place a charities commissioner widely respected across the sector and an expanded and more representative ACNC Advisory Board; and lifting distributions from giving funds to six per cent to get more philanthropic funds to existing charities sooner. This government is a fast friend to charities, and we will continue to support the charity sector and the important work that they do to build social capital and build a stronger and more connected Australian community.”
“We have set a goal of doubling philanthropy by 2030, not because we believe government should step back but because we believe that many of Australia's biggest challenges can only be dealt with through the collaboration of the government and the community sector working together.”
“My three principles for giving are that we need to have evidence, we need to have enthusiasm and we need to make it easy to donate, and this is one way, alongside simplifying donations through workplace giving and simplifying bequests, that the government is supporting the charity sector. It is a recommendation of the Productivity Commission's Future foundations for giving report that the government remove the $2 threshold for tax-deductible donations to entities with deductible gift recipient status, and this will help form part of the government's response to that report and to the blueprint report.”
“ING's Everyday Round Up allows customers to round up purchases to the nearest $1 or $5, with the amount going to charity. The challenge at the moment, though, is that round-up for charity isn't tax deductible, even though, over the course of a year, people may find themselves giving quite a considerable amount to charity. That's the advantage of what the government is doing today. Organisations that consolidate somebody's giving would be able to produce an end-of-year tax-deductible statement which would allow people to claim all of those 19c, 37c and 57c donations they'd made through the course of the year, which might, by the end of the year, add up to hundreds or even thousands of dollars. By encouraging microdonations, we're helping to achieve the government's goal of making it easier to give.”
“Round up donations are a simple way in which people can support a cause that they care about through providing spare change to support that cause. Woolworths allowed customers at the till to round up for charity and, in a single month, raised $770,000 for Foodbank. Myer often partners with local community organisations such as The Family Co, an organisation which helps people escape family violence. Some platforms are set up to encourage round-up for charity. Rounda is a microdonation app that lets you choose your charity and securely link cards to contribute. The difference allows users to automatically donate change from everyday purchases and includes a 'round-up for change' approach. GoGive is a tool that charities can add to their websites, allowing supporters to set up round-up deductions.”
“But even in 1966 it was worth $30 in today's money, and today, of course, it has been eroded. Entities with deductible gift recipient status are not required to provide receipts for donations, which means that there is a challenge for people who are claiming small-threshold donations. The Future foundations for giving report from the Productivity Commission notes that there have been past recommendations. The Henry tax review thought the threshold should be taken up from $2 to $25, and the Not-for-profit Sector Tax Concession Working Group recommended removing it for simplicity, as did the Industry Commission report in 1995. Consultations by the Productivity Commission produced varied responses, with many supporting the removal of the $2 donation threshold. One of the things that we have seen, however, is a growth in round-up donations.”
“I'm speaking today in my capacity as assistant minister for charities about schedule 1 of the Treasury Laws Amendment (Delivering an Efficient and Trusted Tax System) Bill 2026. It is a measure which removes the $2 threshold for deductions of gifts or contributions. This threshold has a long and strange history. It goes back to 1915, when a minimum income tax deduction for giving was introduced. It was at that time relatively high—five pounds for donations to the war effort and 20 pounds for other charitable donations. In 2022 dollars, those figures are $578 and $2,313, respectively. In 1927, the threshold was reduced to one pound, which is $100 in today's money, and it hasn't changed in nominal terms since then. In 1966, of course, one pound became $2, and the $2 deduction threshold remained.”
“These decisions, though not unanimous, were important in shaping the notion of rights in Australia. Sir Anthony Mason enjoyed a relatively quiet retirement. He served on the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal, but he just popped up in interesting places, as he did in a pub in Sydney when four young Australians launched a book called Imagining Australia : Ideas for Our Future . A couple of us had served as High Court associates, but really I'm not quite sure why it was worth his time, except that he was always interested in big ideas and in the future of the country. Sir Anthony Mason shaped Australia for the better and he shaped the Australian legal fabric for the better. He has left an indelible mark on law students, lawyers, judges and presidents alike and will be justly mourned and rightly recognised. Sitting suspended from 11:19 to 11:35”
“Terra nullius is a doctrine to which no-one in the House or the Senate would today subscribe; not even our most extreme members of parliament would suggest that terra nullius is true, and yet, remarkably, that was the law of the land. With Mabo the notion of native title was introduced. There were critiques that it was overly activist, but, ultimately, native title has become a firm part of the Australian property law system. In other decisions such as Dietrich v The Queen, the High Court under Sir Anthony Mason established that an accused was entitled to publicly funded legal representation. And there were important decisions on constitutionally implied freedom of political communication through Australian Capital Television Pty Ltd v Commonwealth and Nationwide News Pty Ltd v Wills.”
“He served for 15 years as a puisne judge and then in 1987 was appointed Chief Justice. He retired in 1995 after reaching the constitutionally mandatory retirement age of 70. As I said, his career began as a conservative judge, but he moved the court away from the strict legalism that had characterised the chief justiceship of Owen Dixon towards a more flexible approach, epitomised in cases such as Cole v Whitfield, Polyukhovich v Commonwealth and most notably during Mabo v Queensland (No. 2). The Mabo decision shook Australia. It got rid of that outdated falsehood of terra nullius, the idea that there was nothing here when European settlers arrived.”
“It is a pleasure to rise to pay tribute to Sir Anthony Mason, one of the most distinguished jurists Australia has ever produced. As an associate on the High Court of Australia to Justice Michael Kirby, I had the privilege of coming to know Sir Anthony Mason somewhat. He turned up as a surprise guest to a book launch we did in 2004 and was as gracious then as he was throughout his career. Sir Anthony Mason served as an aircraftman in World War II, and his career began in the black-letter realm of the Sydney bar. Many at that stage would not have expected him to be the innovative jurist that he became later in his career. He served on the Supreme Court until 1972, when he was appointed to the bench of the High Court of Australia and was one of the last Australians to receive a knighthood.”
“The reforms will not only protect consumers but also support productivity by promoting dynamic and competitive markets. They will help ensure businesses are not incentivised to adopt unfair tactics, and will increase consumers' confidence to engage in markets, particularly when transacting online. Full details of the measure are contained in the explanatory memorandum. Debate adjourned.”
“Reform of this scale is only possible when all governments share a commitment to fairness and transparency. I thank the experts in Office of Parliamentary Counsel and in the Department of Treasury, including Nicole Ryan, Phoebe Butcher, Stacie Lawson, Tessa Cramond, Matthew Osinski, Ira Goyal, Reese O'Sullivan, Megan Peterson, Taylor Fouracre and Angelina Kosev, and my advisers Tori Barker and Meg Thomas, for their work on this bill. Their hard work has helped forge a fairer society and a more dynamic economy. This bill is a principled, proportionate and timely response to real harms identified through genuine consultation, backed by evidence, and aligned with Australians' sense of fairness. It ensures the Australian Consumer Law remains robust and capable of protecting people in a rapidly changing economy.”
“Australia's consumer movement has also been instrumental in consistently bringing consumer experience to the forefront, including Erin Turner and her team at the Consumer Policy Research Centre, Stephanie Tonkin and her team at the Consumer Action Law Centre, former CHOICE CEO Ashley de Silva and his team, Jeannie Paterson and her team at the University of Melbourne's Centre for Artificial Intelligence and Digital Ethics, as well as community legal centres, financial counsellors and many others. I also acknowledge the strong support and partnership of my state and territory consumer affairs minister colleagues and their officials: Anoulack Chanthivong, Nick Staikos, Deb Frecklington, Guy Barnett, Tara Cheyne, Tony Buti, Marie-Clare Boothby and former South Australian minister Andrea Michaels.”
“It will strengthen trust and boost competition. And it will make the Australian marketplace a place where good businesses thrive by doing the right thing. They will also help restore confidence that online markets can work on straightforward terms: when prices are what they seem, when leaving a service is as simple as joining it, and where firms who act fairly are not punished. For example, nine in ten Australians say that they would likely purchase from the same organisation if cancelling its subscription was quick and simple. I want to acknowledge the vital contribution of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, including Chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb and Deputy Chair Catriona Lowe, whose enforcement work and market studies have provided important insights into the effects of unfair trading practices.”
“Working closely with the Assistant Treasurer and Australian Securities and Investments Commission, we will consider whether any alignment of protections within the financial services sector is necessary. Any expansion will be considered carefully, respecting the distinct frameworks providing consumer protections for financial products and advice. In presenting this bill, we reaffirm a basic principle: markets work best when they're fair. When consumers are respected rather than worn down. When design helps people make informed choices rather than steering them into unwanted ones. When transparency is rewarded and hidden fees are not. The reforms in this bill, banning unfair trading practices, cracking down on drip pricing, and cleaning up subscriptions, will give Australians back time, clarity and agency.”
“We're also supporting health and care professionals to work to their full scope of practice. Together, these reforms strengthen competition and dynamism, boost productivity and contribute to a fairer marketplace. Other unfair trading practices This bill focuses on consumer protections. But unfair trading practices don't only affect individuals. Small businesses and franchisees often face the same vulnerabilities when dealing with larger suppliers. The explanatory memorandum notes the government will consult on extending unfair trading protections to small businesses, including those in franchising. That work is underway. We will release a public consultation on the expansion of these reforms shortly and will have legislation in parliament later this year.”
“In the labour market, reforms to non-compete clauses and other restrictive practices will help improve job mobility and productivity. The right to repair is being extended to agricultural machinery, ensuring that farmers have genuine choice in how they service their equipment. Through a revitalised National Competition Policy, supported by a $900 million National Productivity Fund, the government is working with states and territories to remove commercial and industrial planning and zoning barriers that make it hard for new entrants to compete. We're progressing reforms to create a single national market for goods, streamline standards, improve heavy vehicle productivity, and improve occupational licensing so that workers can move more freely across jurisdictions.”
“Australians will be able to see clearly when a product has gotten smaller, but the price has stayed the same or gone up. Under the former government, the supermarket food and grocery code was merely voluntary, without penalties for wrongdoing. Labor's food and grocery code is mandatory, backed by strong penalties that prevent supermarkets from using their market power to unfairly squeeze farmers and other suppliers. Penalties matter. That's why this government has increased the first limb of the maximum penalties under the Competition and Consumer Act—from $10 million to $50 million in 2022, and last month up to $100 million. Stronger sanctions ensure that breaches of consumer law can't be dismissed as a mere cost of doing business. They ensure that businesses of all sizes face meaningful consequences for conduct that undermines fairness.”
“Our government has legislated the most significant overhaul of Australia's merger laws in 50 years, ensuring that large mergers are properly assessed before proceeding and that anticompetitive acquisitions don't escape scrutiny. We've increased funding for the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission by more than $30 million, enabling stronger action against misleading pricing tactics, particularly in supermarkets and other consumer facing markets. We have outlawed unfair contract terms, and for the first time gave the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission and Australian Securities and Investments Commission the power to seek penalties against companies that breach those laws. We're strengthening the Unit Pricing Code and cracking down on shrinkflation.”
“The bill also establishes a framework for reminder notices, ensuring that consumers receive timely, sensible prompts when a trial period is ending or a renewal is approaching. In addition, cancellation must be straightforward. It must be easy to find. And it must require only the steps that are reasonably necessary. A contract that can be entered in seconds should not take half an afternoon to escape. Many reputable businesses already operate in this simple, fair, transparent manner. This bill ensures that all businesses meet that standard. Broader competition and consumer agenda The bill forms part of a wider agenda to strengthen competition, improve transparency and support consumers across the economy.”
“Nearly half have spent more time than intended trying to exit a service. One in three have felt pressured to stay. One in 10 Australians has given up trying to cancel and kept paying for a service they no longer wanted. Some people have been so frustrated by unwanted subscriptions they've chosen to cancel a credit card or a bank account just to get rid of the recurring subscriptions. The estimated consumer detriment from spending on unwanted subscriptions by Australian consumers is $971 million per year. This is a hidden drain on household budgets. This bill addresses these problems directly. Businesses must clearly disclose that a customer is entering a subscription, what it costs, how long it runs, how it renews, and how it can be ended. The information must be provided prominently and in a way that is easy to understand.”
“A business that discloses its full price upfront should not be made to look more expensive than a rival that waits until the final screen to reveal unavoidable charges. Ending subscription traps Third, this bill addresses subscription traps, a growing frustration in modern consumer life. Subscriptions are now a regular part of household budgeting. Subscriptions provide access to news, fitness, entertainment, software and many other services. But too often, subscription arrangements are designed around the assumption that consumers will forget to cancel free trials, won't notice renewals, or will struggle to find the cancellation pathway. Research from the Consumer Policy Research Centre shows the scale of this issue. Three in four Australians have had a negative experience when trying to cancel a subscription.”
“This bill requires businesses to disclose mandatory transaction-based charges at the same time they display the base price. There should be no last-minute surprises, no artificially low headline prices that rise only after the consumer has invested time and attention, and no reliance on the consumer's reluctance to abandon the purchase after coming so far. The bill does not prohibit transaction fees. It prohibits hiding them. It ensures that businesses doing the right thing are not disadvantaged by competitors who conceal the true cost until the final step. That matters for competition as well as fairness. We know from behavioural economics that people anchor on the first price they see, and once they have invested effort in reaching the final stage of a transaction, they're less inclined to walk away.”
“It's about dealing with conduct that crosses the line from persuasion into manipulation, conduct that harms consumers and undermines fair competition. Stopping drip pricing Second, the bill deals with a practice that almost every Australian has encountered. A consumer sees a price that seems reasonable. But as they progress through the transaction, new fees begin to appear, a booking fee here, a service charge there, often only revealed at the very end of the process. In one example, a concert ticket promoted for $109.90 rose to $117.45 once a compulsory $7.55 service fee was added at the last stage of the process. By then, the consumer has already invested time and attention, and may feel locked into completing the purchase. That is drip pricing. Australians have had a gutful.”
“It captures conduct that does not neatly fall within the existing prohibitions on misleading conduct or unconscionability, but which nonetheless exploits behavioural biases, overwhelms consumers with complexity, or structures choices in a way that leads people towards decisions they would not otherwise make. To provide practical guidance, the bill includes a non-exhaustive, indicative list of examples of practices that may contravene the new prohibition. These include: These examples help businesses understand where the line is drawn without restricting ordinary, legitimate commercial behaviour. This prohibition isn't about stopping businesses from promoting their products. It's not about stopping advertising.”
“It ensures consumers are protected not only from outright deception but also from the kinds of subtle, cumulative influences that can undermine genuine choice. This bill does three things. A general prohibition on unfair trading practices First, the bill introduces something Australians might reasonably have assumed already existed: a simple rule that businesses should not engage in unfair trading practices. It sets a straightforward principle: businesses must not manipulate consumers or unreasonably distort the environment in which consumers make, or are likely to make, decisions, in circumstances that cause, or are likely to cause, detriment. This is a principles based test.”
“Over the past four years, through detailed consultation with consumers, businesses, experts, regulators and our state and territory counterparts, a clear message emerged. There are practices that do not meet the threshold for misleading or deceptive conduct, and that may also fall short of the high bar for unconscionable conduct, but which nevertheless distort decision making, cause real harm and impose an economic cost. These gaps in the Australian Consumer Law allow manipulative or unreasonably distortive tactics to slip through, even when the impact on consumers is significant. This bill closes those gaps. It modernises the Australian Consumer Law to reflect the realities of how Australians now buy, compare and subscribe.”
“But we also expect that competition to occur on fair terms. We do not expect to be steered into decisions we didn't intend or worn down by design features that make the right decision harder than it should be. The evidence suggests these aren't isolated irritants. More than half of reported consumer problems now occur from online purchases. One in 10 people say that an online provider has manipulated their choices, while more than a quarter encountered unexpected charges added late in the transaction. In a digital economy, design isn't neutral. Buttons, prompts, defaults, timers and cancellation pathways can all shape behaviour. These are signs of a marketplace in which confusion, pressure and obstruction can become a business model.”
“This isn't vigorous competition. It is friction by design. The way Australians buy and subscribe has changed profoundly. Today, people make decisions about goods and services in many different ways: by strolling the aisles of their local stores, by searching online for the best price or by entering subscription arrangements that renew automatically. Some transactions take place entirely in person, while others occur entirely online, but the experience of choosing and managing services now spans a wide range of channels. These changes have given Australians more choice and convenience, but they have also created conditions in which certain business practices can pressure, confuse or trap consumers. Australians are hardworking and fair minded. We expect businesses to compete vigorously and to innovate.”
“I move: That this bill be now read a second time. The Competition and Consumer Amendment (Unfair Trading Practices) Bill 2026 amends the Australian Consumer Law and implements the government's commitment to protect consumers from unfair trading practices, subscription traps and drip pricing. Australians know exactly what this bill is about because they have lived it. Trying to decide on an online purchase, they suddenly find themselves pressured with a countdown timer or a warning that there are 'only two left in stock', despite the fact that the retailer has plenty available. They subscribe to a gym and manage the payment online, but, when they try to unsubscribe, they are told they have to make a phone call. They spot a bargain online, but when they get to the check-out they discover a compulsory 'service fee' added to their basket.”
“That's $46 million back into the Canberra community, making life easier for households and strengthening the ACT economy. Only Labor is committed to Medicare, only Labor is committed to bulk-billing and only Labor is delivering cheaper medicines.”
“That ensures that more Canberrans are able to see a doctor without worrying about their bank balance. They're able to see a doctor, show their Medicare card and that's all it takes, and that's on top of what we've done to make medicines cheaper for Canberrans and for all Australians. When we came to office, the general patient co-payment had reached $42.50 a script. We have reduced it to $25, the lowest level in two decades. We've introduced 60-day prescriptions for eligible medicines, ensuring that patients can receive two month's supply on a single co-payment. We lowered the safety net threshold so more households qualify for more discounts on medicines. In the ACT, this has seen more than five million cheaper PBS scripts filled, with estimated patient savings of $46 million.”
“I was really pleased to join my ACT colleagues, Senator Katy Gallagher and the members for Bean and Canberra, Dave Smith and Alicia Payne, in Tuggeranong last week for the announcement of the opening of a new clinic, Next Practice Deakin, putting in place a purely bulk-billing practice. This is part of three new bulk-billing clinics which the federal government is funding with $10.5 million in bulk-billing GP attraction initiatives. In my electorate, there will be Macquarie General Practice, the first fully bulk-billing clinic in a very long time in Gungahlin, and all of those bulk-billing clinics will be open by 30 June this year. When we came to office, there were only 10 fully bulk-billing clinics in the ACT. Now there are 22, and that number is going upwards.”
“Bulk-billing is at the very heart of Medicare. Labor created Medicare, and Labor stands by the principle that when you go to the doctor, you should only need your Medicare card, not your credit card. And that is why, after seeing bulk-billing rates in freefall under the former government, with Peter Dutton as health minister, we have made a record investment in Medicare. Labor has increased the bulk-billing rebates for individuals and the bulk-billing rebates for practices. We have made a historic investment in bulk-billing, with the target of seeing nine out of 10 doctor's visits bulk-billed by 2030. In the ACT, which, historically, has had a lower rate of bulk-billing than every state and territory, we have put in place additional incentives.”
“Australia is not a significant player in the Middle East, but we have urged on all parties that it is time to reach a ceasefire and that it is time to bring this conflict to an end.”
“The National Coordination Mechanism is an important way in which the Minister for Climate Change and Energy has engaged with states and territories on supply and distribution. We understand that this crisis isn't homegrown. This is a crisis caused by the decision of the United States and Israel to take military action in Iran. At the outset of the conflict, the United States and Israel said that the principal goal was to decrease the chances of Iran being able to build a nuclear weapon. That having been achieved, the government has encouraged the US and Israel to bring the conflict to an early conclusion. It is in those countries interests, as well as in Australia's interests and in the interests of the global economy to bring this conflict to a swift end.”
“Under us, we've seen an increase in the share of EVs on the roads from single digits to double digits, and that means that there are fewer people needing to line up at the bowser and there is less pressure on our fuel supply. We have temporarily changed petrol and diesel standards to get more fuel flowing, and we have tasked the ACCC to issue on-the-spot fines. The cabinet is engaging with international partners to keep supply flowing. We have a range of international relationships with countries such as Singapore and Korea, through which much of our oil flows. Indeed, in the case of Korea, they are also a significant recipient of Australian gas, so it is in the interests of both countries to ensure that that supply flows.”
“We increased that to a maximum of $50 million or three times the benefit of the breach, or 10 per cent of turnover—and just recently we increased that maximum penalty to $100 million. We have provided additional resources to the ACCC to crack down on anticompetitive and anticonsumer conduct. We've released a fifth of the Australian fuel reserves, and we've targeted that at regional areas. We have announced the halving of the fuel excise for diesel and petrol and a cut to the heavy vehicle road user charge to zero for three months—measures which provide motorists with some relief at the bowser. I remember the way in which the former prime minister Scott Morrison railed against electric vehicles.”
“We have set out a collective approach with the states and territories, guided by four levels of action: level 1, plan and prepare; level 2, keeping Australia moving—that's the current level; level 3, taking targeted action; and, level 4, protecting critical services for all Australians. We are ensuring that fuel supply flows to those who need it. This has been done with a range of measures, such as the appointment of a national Fuel Supply Taskforce Coordinator, Anthea Harris, and counterparts in the states and territories. We increased the penalties for petrol companies that rip off Australians. Those penalties were $10 million when this government came to office.”
“We've increased corporate tax transparency with a world-leading public country-by-country reporting register, ensuring that large multinationals operating in Australia need to disclose the amount of tax paid in countries around the world. If you are tendering for a large government contract, you now have to disclose your country of tax residency. We have boosted funding for the ATO's Tax Avoidance Taskforce by $200 million a year and extended the operation of the taskforce. We've put in place reforms which have curtailed the ability of companies to operate in opaque fashion through a beneficial ownership register, ensuring that firms need to disclose their true owners. This is an important measure when many Australians are looking to the government for comfort and reassurance at a time of fuel pressures.”
“Our changes have ensured that offshore gas companies are paying more tax sooner. They have increased the number of companies paying PRRT from 11 to 16 in 2023-24, and, collectively, the oil and gas industry paid almost $12 billion in taxes in 2023-24. That's on top of the important reforms that Labor has made to multinational tax. No government in Australian history has done more on multinational tax fairness than the Albanese government. No government around the world is doing more to improve multinational tax integrity than Australia. We put in place legislation to ensure multinationals pay their fair share of tax, setting a 15 per cent global minimum tax. We curtailed excessive debt deductions, increasing the revenue to the budget by hundreds of millions of dollars.”
“As a result of the Treasury gas transfer pricing review and the Callaghan review, the Treasurer announced that the government would limit to 90 per cent the share of petroleum resource rent tax income which could be offset by deductions to 90 per cent from 1 July 2023. That sounds quite technical, so I'll put it in plain terms. Previously the west coast gas projects had not been on track to pay PRRT until the 2030s—we brought that into the 2020s. We can see that, over the latest budget update forecast, the government will collect $5.4 billion in PRRT over the four years to 2028-29, and that's on top of the corporate tax those companies will pay. We've seen an increase in the company tax paid by the oil and gas sector from $1.1 billion in the five years to 2021 to $10.4 billion in 2023-24.”
“It can help households and firms as we make that clean energy transition. While batteries and pumped hydro, the so-called wet batteries, are increasing, they are still costlier, and gas has a bridging role to play. We've seen over recent years Australia's LNG production declining. Domestic gas demand is falling as households move off gas production, notwithstanding that we still have five million homes connected to gas for heating, cooking and hot water. Our LNG exports fell to the lowest level in four years, largely as a reduction in LNG demand from Asia. The member talks about the importance of fair taxation of the oil and gas industry, and it's important to draw the House's attention to the decision that the Treasurer made in 2023.”
“The Future Gas Strategy notes that that'll occur through increased electrification of processes that currently use natural gas, replacing natural gas with low-emissions gases and converting remaining emissions from natural gas to be fully offset. But the Future Gas Strategy also notes the role that gas plays in supporting our economy through the transition to net zero. Gas operates as a backstop for renewables, it's fast ramping and dispatchable, and it can complement variable renewable sources of power. California and Germany are just two examples of economies which have seen coal exiting, renewables expanding and gas supporting that transition. Gas does emit CO2, but 40 to 60 per cent less per unit of electricity than coal. Gas also supports hard-to-abate industries, like steel, cement, chemicals, and ammonia and hydrogen production.”
“At the outset, I'd like to thank the member for Mackellar for bringing this important debate in the matter of public importance. Gas constitutes about a quarter of Australia's energy needs, according to the Future Gas Strategy, and it has an important role as a bridging fuel in the carbon transition. It's heavily used in manufacturing; cement, bricks, glass products, fertiliser and EV batteries all depend on a reliable and affordable supply of gas. Australia exports around three quarters of our gas, which plays a role in the energy transition and in countries to our north. As the Future Gas Strategy notes, Australia can't reach our 2050 net zero targets without reducing and decarbonising our consumption of natural gas.”
“The three major parties of the right in this country have one thing in common: they're very happy to trade in anger but very unhappy to actually come up with answers. They are all about slogans, but they have no solutions to Australia's problems. If you want to think about how Australia is facing the crisis in the Middle East today, just think about how we would have been placed if the coalition had remained in office. Under them, when fuel prices exceeded $2 a litre, at the beginning of the Ukraine war, what was the biggest penalty that the ACCC could impose? It was a $10 million penalty. We increased penalties to $50 million in 2022—”
“It will be good for health, which is why it enjoys the backing of so many medical advocacy bodies, such as the Australian Medical Association and the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners. It will bring peace of mind to Australians who want to go and find out more about their genetic history, either through curious inquiry or because they are keen to see what genetic testing reveals about them and how they can help their own health and that of their families. I commend the bill to the House.”
“Under the bill that is before the House, it will be possible for people like Frank—a pseudonym, of course—to take forward the sorts of genetic tests that benefit them. We are acting on behalf of vulnerable Australians. The most affluent can get away without buying life insurance, but vulnerable Australians often feel a need to purchase life insurance in order to forestall the risk that their family are left adversely affected by the economic consequences of their death. This bill will ensure a greater sense of equity and protect some of the most vulnerable in our community. It will be good for medical research, and that is why it enjoys the backing of so many medical research companies.”