Sam Birrell
Nicholls · National Party · Australia
“They will put it maybe in New South Wales, Western Australia or Queensland, but they won't even consider Victoria. The taxes, the government interference and now this proposed work-from-home legislation just mean that Victoria is not an option.”
“The Mitchell Shire Council has identified the Kilmore-Wallan Bypass as one of the highest advocacy priorities, but the project has been languishing for years. The bypass is essential to improve safety, reduce congestion and return the historic town centre to local residents and businesses.”
“As I've often said in this place, it's a great privilege to represent the electorate of Nicholls in northern Victoria, one of the great food-producing parts of Australia. Recently, I had the great honour to go to a place called Legacy Packing in Cobram for the official relaunch of their state-of-the-art packing facility.”
“As at the last election, the AEC boundary changes meant that the town of Kilmore came into the electorate that I represent, the electorate of Nicholls, and Kilmore is one of the oldest inland towns in Australia. It's a beautiful place. It has bluestone buildings, a historic jail and a monument to Hume and Hovell.”
“A major agribusiness operator in northern Victoria who operates very successfully has told me: 'We're doing no more investment in Australia. The government's making it too hard.”
“We've also got high-tech investment in the dairy industry and the apple and pear industry and we have some new investments in the processing facility SPC, which is an iconic brand in Australia that processes peaches, pears, apples and also tomatoes.”
The complete record
Every one of 590 lines we hold for Sam Birrell, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 3 of 12.
“What do we take from socialism, what do we take from capitalism, and how do we set the place up to be really vibrant and dynamic? The history of Australia in recent times is really interesting. You had a Whitlam government that was quite a left-wing government and wanted a lot of government control in everything; a Fraser government that rejected those ideas but didn't make the reforms that it should have made; and a Hawke-Keating government that perhaps rejected the old Labor ideology—which has come back, by the way—of big government and tried to open Australia's economy up to something better, to the dynamism and the influence that a really strong and competitive global private enterprise can have. Hawke and Keating understood that, and they understood that was the way to get Australia going.”
“The logical extension of this, of course, is socialism then leading to communism, where the government is all controlling and government spending is everything in the economy. On the other side of political philosophy, there is capitalism and the free market, where you sort of just let it rip. Now, those philosophies at the pure ends of the scale are, of course, unworkable and unacceptable. I think the examples of eastern Europe in the 1970s and 1980s show what the ultimate impact of big government is. And the example in the United States—though it's a great country with great innovation—shows what a free market that goes too far without a safety net can be. So we need to decide, in Australia, where we are going to settle in these ideas of how big the government should be and what kind of a society we should be.”
“I also rise to speak on Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2026-2027, the budget that was handed down recently. Budgets are important documents not just for the figures that a lot of people talk about—'We're funding this. We're paying for that. We're cutting this.' It really does set out some pointers and directions of where a government's true motivations lie, where their true philosophies lie and where they want to take the country. In the history of political thought in recent times, there have been a lot of experiments around the world as to how to manage a society, how to manage an economy. There are those who argue that we should have a bigger government with more spending, more people employed by the government.”
“They just didn't have the courage and decency to put it to the Australian people. Was it the right policy change? No, it's higher taxes dressed up as intergenerational fairness. It won't make it easier for young people to buy their first home. Their own documents say fewer homes will be built. Labor's spending spree threatens to keep inflation high and interest rates rising, and young people's deposit savings are now being taxed more. That is the real barrier to young people getting into the housing market.”
“Tuesday's Labor budget is a failure and a breach of trust on so many levels. There are two questions about the big changes—negative gearing and capital gains tax. Question 1: is it the right policy change? Question 2: is this the right way to make such significant changes? Question 2 first—John Howard decided Australia needed a goods and services tax. He had the courage and decency to take this policy to the election. In 2019, Bill Shorten wanted to make changes to CGT and negative gearing. He had the courage and decency to take it to an election. Courage and decency are in short supply in this Albanese government. In many interviews, they say, 'We are being upfront,' but the time to be upfront is before people cast their ballot. They say, 'Our thinking has evolved, so we changed.' I call nonsense on that. They always wanted it.”
“There is finally some money in the Growing Regions and Stronger Communities grant funds, but, overwhelmingly, this is a bad budget. And the intergenerational equity argument is a fallacy, given that young Australians are going to be paying for this government's reckless and unproductive spending for most of their working lives.”
“Real wages are going backwards, living standards are going backwards, and the government response is more taxes, including changes to capital gains tax that they repeatedly said, before the election, would not happen. The people of Nicholls did not vote for this, and they did not vote for higher taxes, broken promises, cuts to their communities and a government that thinks cities matter more than regional Australians. Now, I don't carp for the sake of it, and, if there is something good in the budget, I will acknowledge it. There is money in this budget to accelerate supporting infrastructure to open up land for housing. That was a coalition policy taken to the last election. This is a lot less money than what we had promised, but it's a step in the right direction in terms of housing developments.”
“Across this budget, regional Australia has been hit with at least $11 billion in cuts: $6.5 billion gone from the Inland Rail, a project that would have taken 200,000 trucks off our roads and saved $280 million of diesel every single year; $4.7 billion gone from infrastructure; $100 million from the National Water Grid; and nearly $200 million gone from biosecurity, drought support and regional trade for our farmers. Australians wanted relief from the high cost of living. Instead, we have inflation heading to five per cent, and energy, food, insurance and rental costs are soaring. A typical family with a mortgage is $32,000 a year worse off, and that's only going to get worse.”
“Labor's fifth budget is a budget of broken promises—broken promises on tax, broken promises on the cost of living and broken promises to the regional Australians who feed this nation, fuel this nation and build this nation. It betrays the bush. Labor have said they wouldn't raise your taxes. They have—$50 billion in higher taxes, including $15 billion ripped straight out of the pockets of working Australians through higher personal income tax. And who pays the price for this? It's families in Shepparton, farmers across the Goulburn Valley, small business owners on every main street from Kilmore to Cobram. But it gets worse, because, while Labor are taking more from the regions, they are giving less back.”
“It is pleasing to see the government beginning to take this seriously, but there is more to do. There is a longer question than the immediate issue of getting us through this particular Middle Eastern crisis, and that is addressing our vulnerability to overseas supply chains, particularly when it comes to liquid fuel supplies. Our long-term strategy for this ensures our food security, our defence security and our national sovereignty.”
“We don't know when the conflict in the Middle East will end or when supply chains will return to normal. We are told there will still be a long sting in the tail of this crisis. Supply is especially an issue for farmers, and the NFF president, Hamish McIntyre, said after the National Cabinet meeting that pressing shortages and crippling costs still need to be addressed through 'an agriculture-specific plan to secure fuel supply for farmers and fishers, including clear "trigger points" for government action to safeguard food production' and 'the inclusion of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry as critical industries under the Liquid Fuel Emergency Act 1984 ' as well as 'targeted small business support for those across the supply chain facing acute financial pressures.' We have been fielding these calls from our regional businesses for the last three weeks, and we have been putting them to the government all through question time over the last two weeks.”
“Small regional transport contractors working on government funded infrastructure projects are reporting to me that they're absorbing thousands of dollars per week in additional diesel costs, with fuel levies not being passed through contractual chains. Operators warn this creates a real risk of withdrawal from projects, workforce disruption and delays to nationally significant infrastructure delivery. There are also human costs and community consequences. Workers commuting daily between regional towns report weekly fuel costs more than doubling, forcing changes to work travel, family routines and household budgets. Across regional communities, constituents consistently link fuel insecurity and price shocks to mental health strain, business stress and uncertainty about the future.”
“There are significant impacts on agriculture and food supply. Livestock, rural and agricultural transport operators in regional Victoria report diesel price spikes to more than $3.20 per litre, combined with rationing and transaction limits as low as 50 litres, making normal operations unworkable. There are harvest contractors in northern Victoria who describe prolonged diesel shortages leaving machinery idle during critical harvest windows, directly threatening feed supplies for dairy farms and risking adverse animal welfare outcomes. Bulk fuel distributors in regional electorates report running out of diesel within hours of delivery and forced rationing for farmers and extreme volatility in replacement costs making day-to-day trading impossible. It's affecting infrastructure as well.”
“Owners-drivers and family freight businesses in towns such as Broadford, Mooroopna and Yarrawonga say fuel now accounts for up to 30 per cent of expenditure, with weekly fuel use measured in thousands of litres. Employees in logistics-dependent regional businesses report fuel levies of 25 per cent and 30 per cent being passed through by transport providers, driving up costs for businesses and customers alike. Regional waste, recycling and sanitation businesses warn that restricted access to diesel threatens continuity of essential services for schools, hospitals, aged-care facilities and local communities, raising public health concerns. Regional households and small-business owners describe fuel as not optional but essential, linking rising petrol and diesel costs to broader cost-of-living pressures, inflation and interest rate stress.”
“I acknowledge that the Albanese government has finally heeded our advice and provided limited but immediate relief for motorists and businesses. It's been a long couple of weeks in this place trying to hammer home the real-world impacts of the liquid fuel crisis. In many of those regional areas that we represent, those impacts continue. I want to give a summary of some of the issues being raised with me in Nicholls. Small freight operators in regional Victoria and southern New South Wales report diesel prices increasing by more than $1.50 a litre overnight, placing immediate pressure on cash flow and threatening business viability.”
“I also think that we are about to see, in a real sense, how much our economy and the things that pay for Australia and all of the things that we like—Medicare and all these things—rely on the mining and agriculture industries, which run on diesel. We want to keep those industries going because they pay for the things that we value as a society. They run on that very important thing: diesel. We have to look at fuel security as national security and as part of our sovereign future.”
“We welcome the government bringing on the excise cut, but the amendments from the shadow Treasurer are eminently sensible, and I encourage the government to look at them to make a necessary measure in the legislation even better and to make sure that it considers inflation and the inflationary pressures of anything it might do when making a decision, which is why we talked about offsets. This is a really difficult time for Australia. I worry about what will happen to our industries in the next month. I worry about what's happening to the farmers, who are already talking about reducing the amount of crop they might put in due to fuel issues, but more importantly due to urea supplies, which is fertiliser that comes from gas in the Middle East.”
“In conclusion, fuel tax relief might win a headline, but fuel security wins us our future. The current fuel crisis is not an anomaly. It is a warning. If we content ourselves with short-term relief while ignoring long-term vulnerability, the next crisis will be measured not in cents per litre but in days until the tanks run dry. That's not to be alarmist but to think about what could happen to Australia. Everyone in this chamber loves this country; I have no doubt about that. I'm not sure about the other one, but everyone in this chamber loves this country and wants to see it succeed. Therefore, we need to have these discussions about what a future secure Australia looks like. Fuel security is national security, and Australia can do better in this area and must do better in this area.”
“We've got to make a choice about Australia's future, and we've got to acknowledge what we are. We're not a small, resource-poor island nation. We're a vast continent rich in energy, minerals and industrial capability, yet we've chosen policies that leave us dependent on long, fragile supply chains for the single most critical input to our economy. Fuel self-reliance is not isolationism; it is resilience. It doesn't mean ending trade or disengaging from the world. It means securing essentials so Australia cannot be coerced, paralysed or brought to its knees by events beyond our control. It actually strengthens our trade position. It strengthens our strategic value to our allies, and therefore it strengthens our position in an economic sense but also in a security sense.”
“Fuel tax relief may help motorists this quarter, and we called for it. I acknowledge that the government has moved in this direction at the urging of the opposition last week, but it doesn't do anything to address Australia's near-total reliance on imported diesel, the vulnerability of maritime supply routes, the collapse of domestic refining capacity and the absence of a credible plan for crisis or wartime fuel supply—and lower prices do not equal secure supply. By focusing on short-term relief without a long-term strategy, the government risks giving Australians a false sense of security. The other issue is that, on its own, a fuel excise cut could be inflationary to an already inflationary economy. That is why the coalition set out a very sensible plan for offsets.”
“Thirdly, we need to pursue synthetic fuels at scale; Coal-to-liquids and gas-to-liquids are proven technologies that are already used overseas, and Australia has abundant feedstocks and the industrial capacity to do the same. Fourthly, we need to treat reserves as a bridge, not a destination. We should increase stocks but only alongside a credible plan to sustain supply. Finally, we should treat fuel security as a core national responsibility, with dedicated planning, funding and accountability. None of this is radical stuff. It's pragmatic risk management that any business would do, and it's in the interests of a nation to do it, when looking at sovereignty. It's pragmatic risk management in an increasingly dangerous world. This brings us back to the government's announcement and the gap in the government's response.”
“Australia's refineries were built for a petrol-heavy economy, and that no longer necessarily exists. The point does need to be made that electric vehicles can take over some of the passenger car fleet in metropolitan areas, and we welcome that. I just think that it should be market driven, not taxpayer-subsidy driven. But obviously there are new and emerging technologies, and people who live in cities and want to embrace that can and should, and this might encourage them to do that. What we don't want is to penalise regional people who need diesel vehicles. We need diesel focused refining capability that matches today's demand.”
“This is not policy at this point, but it is a valuable contribution to the debate at a time when I think Australia and Australians are starting to look at what we think we've always known, which is that we can fill our diesel tanks of our necessary fleet of vehicles that contribute to not only mining and agriculture—the things that pay for Australia—but also supply chains, getting food to markets and all of these important things, and just hoping that the ship arrives from the Asian refinery is not enough. Firstly, the research report recommends that we remove barriers to domestic exploration and production. Much of what is required is regulatory clarity and political permission, not necessarily taxpayer subsidies. The markets can do this. Secondly, we need to expand and modernise refining capacity.”
“Domestic production is really the only strategy that delivers genuine fuel security—not diversification, not electrification, not modest stockpiles. Only producing fuel at home changes the structure of Australia's risk profile when it comes to fuel security. If Australia can produce a meaningful share of its own liquid fuels, then shipping blockades lose their coercive power, reserves become a true buffer rather than a last resort, defence planning becomes more realistic and our strategic value to our allies increases. Fuel security is not just an economic issue; it's a defence issue, a food security issue and a sovereignty issue. What does a serious fuel security strategy looks like? Well, the Page report sets out practical framework for action.”
“Some argue that bigger fuel reserves are the answer, and reserves matter, but they are not the solution on their own. Australia currently holds around 30 days of fuel stocks, far less than many comparable nations. But reserves buy time; they do not restore supply, and, without a credible way to replace fuel once reserves are drawn down, stockpiling simply delays the point of failure. It becomes a countdown clock, not a safety net. That is why a strategy focused on reserves alone gives the illusion of security without delivering the reality. The core finding of the Page Research Centre, which should have been obvious and has been obvious to people who have sat in this place, is that fuel security is national security.”
“The Page report doesn't deal in hypotheticals. It looks at what is already happening. Conflict in the Middle East has disrupted shipping through key choke points, insurance markets have withdrawn cover for tankers, prices have spiked and physical supplies have tightened despite the conflict being thousands of kilometres away. The lesson is obvious: if a distant conflict can rattle Australia's fuel supply, a major conflict in our own region would be devastating. Modern warfare does not require fleets of tankers to be sunk. The credible threat of missiles, drones, mines or submarines is enough to halt commercial shipping, and in those circumstances Australia cannot assume that the market will provide. Markets cannot deliver fuel that cannot physically reach our shores.”
“The second reality is even more confronting, and that is Australia no longer produces its own fuel in any meaningful sense. We import roughly 90 to 95 per cent of our liquid fuels. More than three quarters of the supply comes from our region in Asia. We have two operating refineries supplying about 20 per cent of demand. But the argument of how many refineries we've got and what we've got here misses the point that they rely heavily on imported feedstock, mostly crude oil from the Middle East. So, in practice, over 90 per cent of Australia's fuel supply depends on ships arriving safely at our ports. That is manageable only if the world remains calm, shipping lanes remain open and markets function as they always have. But, as we've seen in the last month, that is no longer the world we live in.”
“We often talk about fuel as if petrol prices are the whole story, but they are not. Diesel powers freight and logistics across vast distances. It underpins agriculture, mining, construction and manufacturing. It sustains aviation, emergency services and defence operations. Passenger vehicles account for only around 30 per cent of liquid fuel demand in Australia. Around 70 per cent of liquid fuel demand comes from freight, farming, aviation, mining and industry, which rely overwhelmingly on diesel and cannot be electrified at scale in the foreseeable future. So, when the government talks about fuel relief on the one hand and electric vehicles on the other, it is entirely missing the central reality of Australia's diesel dependent economy.”
“They acknowledge that, before the Middle East conflict even started, which has in large part caused this fuel issue, Australia was under serious inflationary pressure due to government spending. The events of recent weeks show that Australia is not dealing with a routine price spike. We are confronting a structural vulnerability, one that goes to the heart of our economy and our national security. That vulnerability is set out clearly in the Page Research Centre's report All at sea: fuel, war and Australia's Achilles heel . It is a warning this parliament cannot afford to ignore. I recommend that every thinking person, every person who cares about Australia's future, read this report by the Page Research Centre. Australia runs on diesel. It doesn't run on slogans. It doesn't run on the government. It runs on diesel.”
“Any measure that offers that short-term relief deserves to be acknowledged. We acknowledge the government for coming to the party on fuel excise relief, as the opposition suggested last week. A temporary reduction in taxes and charges is not a fuel security policy. It may ease the pain today, but it does nothing to protect Australia tomorrow. It is important, but, as the shadow Treasurer said, for it to not be inflationary, it needs to be offset by some other cuts or some other measures in the budget. We need to make sure that this measure itself is not inflationary. I would have thought that was self-evident. So we responsibly made some suggestions about how this excise tax cut could be offset so as not to be inflationary. I think those are sensible measures.”
“I rise to speak on the Treasury Laws Amendment (Fuel Excise Relief) Bill 2026. Before I do, I want to say that people on this side of the chamber will make no apology for bringing to the government's attention the seriousness of the issue, particularly in the industries that keep Australia moving and pay for Australia, which are mining and agriculture. The fact that they haven't been able to get diesel and there have been price shocks seems to have been missed a bit by the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. It is our job, as the representatives of our constituents, to bring these concerns to the attention of the parliament and the government. That's exactly what we've done. Australians are under real pressure at the bowser. Families, small businesses, farmers and freight operators are feeling it every day.”
“We've got some challenges in other parts of the world, and, when I get that information, I'll share it with the community. I want to thank the member for Barton for bringing forward this motion. I think it's important that we talk about the things we agree on, as well as talk about the things we disagree on. And this has given us an opportunity to do the former.”
“Middle Eastern people from the Islamic tradition came after that, but it's meant that we've never seen some of the fundamentalism and radicalism that we've seen, unfortunately, in some other parts of the world and some other parts of Australia. The Albanian community has welcomed us, and, then, after that, the Iraqi mosque, the Turkish mosque and the Afghan mosque followed in welcoming the rest of the community into their faith. Look at this as a faith, but it more than, 'This is our faith.' It is: 'We our Sheppartonians first. We are members of the Goulburn Valley, and Islam is our faith'—or Christianity or Hinduism or Sikhism. That has been one of the success stories of the Greater Shepparton region. I've written to some community leaders and I want to know more about their impressions of why it's worked in Shepparton.”
“Basically, they got off the boat, and the unskilled labour was in Shepparton because we had the fruit farms and dairy farms. People turned up there. Within a generation, most of those people owned farms, and there was no exception no matter where they'd come from. There was always this egalitarian nature, and I always say about Shepparton that your attitude to life, your work ethic and your ability to be an entrepreneur and make a business matters a bit more than who you pray to and what you look like. And I think that's been a really important part of why we've succeeded in multiculturalism. The other thing I've reflected on is that the first mosque came to Shepparton in 1960—the Albanian community, so it was a European Islamic tradition that came first of all to the Greater Shepparton region.”
“It was with great sombreness that the Shepparton Interfaith Network came together for a candlelight vigil at the site of the former synagogue in Shepparton in the wake of the Bondi tragedy. To see all of these people from different religions, particularly the imam from the mosque talking about what the Islam religion really should be, and is, for most people—peace and tolerance and love—was a great example to all of us of people coming together to live with different faiths. I've been reflecting on why Shepparton is such a great example of multiculturalism, and I want to explore this further. I think the region has things for the rest of Australia to learn. Basically, waves of migration came to the region, even before World War II but particularly afterwards, from southern Europe, firstly. Shepparton was where people went.”
“We've heard a lot of people talk about how diversity and faith express themselves in their community, and I've said often in this place, including in my first speech, that Greater Shepparton, the town that I live and grew up in, is one of the great examples of multiculturalism in this country. One of the key elements of that is the Shepparton Interfaith Network. It is made up of Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs and Jewish people. The Catholic priest, Monsignor Peter Jeffrey, was one of the instigators of it, along with another a number of other people. It gives the architecture for people of different faiths around Shepparton to explore each other's religions, cultures and to talk about issues that are very important, particularly when we're faced with the challenges of social cohesion that Australia has been rocked by in recent times.”
“This private members' motion seems to be a great opportunity for people to say very nice things about the member for Barton, and I will be no exception. It's a great motion that the member for Barton has brought, and I had the honour of accompanying her on a delegation to Port Moresby and meeting her mother. Hearing the member for Barton talk about her upbringing previously, I can tell you the apple doesn't fall very far from the tree. Her mother's a truly remarkable person doing some amazing things for the people of Papua New Guinea, and her daughter's making a fine contribution here. It gives me an opportunity to talk about the Shepparton Interfaith Network.”
“Our focus remains on student outcomes, teacher support, classroom safety and genuine accountability of the system. Australian families deserve an education system that delivers results, not just slogans.”
“On fairness and equity, a truly fair education system recognises that regional and disadvantaged students face higher costs and fewer options. Equity means funding that follows need, supports choice and delivers opportunity, not 'one size fits all' agreements that are designed and delivered from Canberra. Parents deserve real choice across government, Catholic and independent schools. My mother, who had an exemplary 40 years in the public school system as a teacher, wanted me to go to a public school, and my father wanted me to go to a Catholic boarding school. In the end, I did a bit of both, and they both had their positives. In closing, the coalition supports public education and teachers, but we will not pretend that a spending announcement equals success.”
“On teaching incentives and training measures, encouraging people into teaching is important, but getting them to stay is the real challenge. Paid prac and scholarships will not fix shortages if graduates enter classrooms that are unsafe, unsupported and overwhelmed. State governments have a huge role to play in making sure that classrooms are safe, supported and not overwhelmed. The coalition believes teacher training must focus on classroom readiness, behaviour management and practical skills. Bullying, as the previous speaker said, is a real concern. It's unacceptable and must be addressed consistently and decisively. National frameworks mean little if schools lack the authority and support to enforce standards. Clear discipline, early intervention and parental engagement are essential to safe learning environments.”
“The simple fact is that annual school funding nearly doubled on the coalition's watch, from around $13 billion in 2013 to over $20 billion in 2022. That is the coalition's record of investing in school education—virtually a doubling of annual school funding in nine years. Labor continues to claim this was a cut, but that is a falsehood. On teachers and workforce shortages, teachers deserve respect, support and safe classrooms, and Labor talks about valuing teachers, but workload, burnout and classroom disruption are driving people out of the profession, and we've got to find ways to keep them in. Teacher shortages are being felt most acutely in regional, rural and remote schools, but there are a number of initiatives to try and address this, such as Teach For Australia and the Nexus program, which I've been involved with.”
“I acknowledge the start of the school year, and I thank the teachers, the principals and the support staff for all their work in classrooms across Australia. The coalition supports strong public schools, but we don't accept Labor's claim that spending announcements alone equal reform and better outcomes. On Labor's record investment claims, funding announcements are not the same as delivery in classrooms. Australian schools are already highly funded by international standards, and that's good, but students have been going backwards in literacy, numeracy and engagement. So more money without accountability does not guarantee better results for students. Despite the claims of Labor, most public schools will still not reach 100 per cent of the Schooling Resource Standard even at the end of the agreement period.”
“We are supporting this bill. I think this is another good initiative by the government. Again, it will be made stronger if the government could look at this amendment and, in the same way they said that fuel excise from the coalition is a good idea, say that these amendments are a good idea too. Let's agree to them and make this legislation stronger.”
“The coalition will work constructively on this legislation, and we are proposing amendments. We want to remove restrictions on domestic oil, gas and crude production because that just makes sense. If we're getting crude, and it's out of the Middle East, and it's being refined in Singapore, those are global emissions; why not have them here? We will ensure that Export Finance Australia can support the industries that underpin energy security, because resilience cannot be built by blocking investment at home and funding imports offshore. In closing, it's important, and Australians need immediate relief. I do congratulate the government on moving on the fuel excise; I think that was important. It came as a result of a call from the opposition last week. I think it's good that the government responded to that call in a positive way.”
“Export Finance Australia's own statement of expectations said, when it was first put in, that it restricts Export Finance Australia from supporting oil, gas or coal and prioritises a renewable-only agenda. I think that goes to the heart of the contradiction that is this whole piece of legislation. As I said, we're supportive of it, but the fact that it's necessary is because, as I said before, I think we wished that things were, when they were not. Under the coalition, Export Finance Australia backed Australia's national interest—whatever that was. But under Labor it's been repurposed to enforce a type of ideology. We are going to move amendments to this. I support the government in its intent to underwrite companies that want to bring necessary fuels, including petrol and diesel, into Australia. The object of it is good.”
“There have been a lot of contributions on what we can do, but we need to go back and say: 'We need diesel. What would happen if there were some supply shocks even worse than the ones we're having now that meant we couldn't get the crude oil to the refinery to make the diesel?' Whether the refinery is in Singapore or Australia, it doesn't matter. If the crude oil doesn't get there, diesel can't be manufactured. Are there other calorific products in Australia, as part of our resources, that we could use to manufacture diesel? I think we need to really look into that. The irony of this legislation is that it amends the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation Act 1991 and the Export Finance Australia mandate.”
“Whether it's taking iron ore to the port, taking bananas from North Queensland to the people who enjoy those and need healthy fresh fruit in supermarkets across Sydney and Melbourne or taking apples from my electorate to the markets, it's all done with diesel. Diesel is a refined product and the most effective and efficient and the cheapest way to make it is out of crude oil, but a lot of the crude oil comes out of the Middle East, so we are reliant on the Middle East. We are going to have to look at whether there are other products—feedstocks, if you like—that have a calorific content that enables us to create diesel from not just crude oil. We need to look at those potentials. I acknowledge that across the parliament we're starting to look at some of those, such as biodiesel from canola, and it's been talked about with ethanol.”
“I was standing in an apple orchard, and I said, 'How are we going to refrigerate these apples when they're harvested if we don't have base-load power—that is, power that's going to be reliably on for 24 hours a day, seven days a week?' This conflict in the Middle East and this global supply shock are a wake-up call that we're a lot more reliant on liquid fossil fuel, particularly on diesel, than we have been prepared to make out. What is diesel? I think a lot of us know it. I put it into my tractor and I put it into my vehicle. It's a critically important fuel for the world because most heavy machinery relies on diesel, whether it's on a farm, in a mine site or to get the goods that go from those mine sites or farms to the consumers.”
“Leadership is about saying, 'This is a really wicked problem,' and not pretending that there is some sort of solution out there, one that we would like to work. I would love it if wind turbines and solar panels could solve the problem, but the reality is that they can't. There's the problem with, as I've said before in this place, base-load power. I was having a debate on Sky News with one of the crossbenchers, and she was saying that base-load power is an antiquated notion and a thing of the past.”
“There's been discussion of biodiesel, and I'm not against biodiesel, but it can't ramp up to deliver what is required in the industry at this point. I think, in combination with the general wishful thinking that renewable energy and electrification can get us where we need to go, this type of utopia—it's not in anyone's interest to pretend that things are something when they're not. Many of us are very concerned about the impacts of climate change, but pretending there are solutions out there, when they simply won't work in the real world, could, as I said in my maiden speech, move the problem of emissions offshore, make us poorer and reduce the standard of living of our people. That's not leadership. Wishful thinking is not leadership.”