Liquid Fuel Supply (Minimum Biobased Petrol Content) Amendment Bill 2022

Strongly supported the bill as a way to boost regional biofuels industries, reduce tailpipe emissions by 28 per cent, support agricultural markets, and improve fuel security, criticising both major parties for hypocrisy on biofuels.

“If we are talking about reducing our footprint, why would we not put E10 in the tank which can be delivered cheaper than standard fuel? By mandating it we can reduce the emissions from petrol-driven vehicles by 28 per cent across Queensland overnight, with no cost to the taxpayer.”— 2023-10-10View Hansard

Moved the second reading as the bill's sponsor, arguing Queensland needs to enforce its ethanol mandate by doubling penalties for non-compliant fuel retailers and requiring E10 to contain at least nine per cent ethanol.

“If retailers are selling E10 fuel at the bowser they would have to take reasonable steps to assure the consumer there is at least nine per cent ethanol in that fuel—not one per cent, not two per cent, not three per cent but nine per cent.”— 2023-08-22View Hansard

Acknowledged opportunities for biofuels in Queensland but focused on the government's alternative approach through sustainable aviation fuel and an options paper, without supporting the KAP bill.

“In May we released an options paper, which has now closed. The paper asked everyone for input about biofuels, sustainable fuels and how we get there.”— 2023-10-10View Hansard

Opposed the bill on behalf of the government, arguing the proposed penalties and enforcement measures are impractical and would not influence motorist behaviour, while highlighting the government's own sustainable liquid fuels strategy.

“Put simply, this is not a question of support for this industry or otherwise, but it is the government's view that the proposals in the private member's bill—the proposed penalties, the fines for noncompliance measures—are impractical.”— 2023-08-22View Hansard

As the bill's sponsor, passionately defended it in reply, arguing it mirrored New South Wales law, exempted small retailers, and would give consumers confidence in E10 fuel quality while sending a signal of support to the biofuels industry.

“We are just trying to give consumers the confidence about what they are buying from the bowser. We are trying to get some alignment with what happens across the border in terms of when a fuel wholesaler in New South Wales comes across the border to Queensland.”— 2023-10-10View Hansard

Strongly supported the bill, arguing the government has failed to enforce the existing ethanol mandate which has never reached the four per cent target since 2017, and that the bill would reduce emissions, fuel costs and reliance on imported oil.

“We must enforce this mandate or we will never reduce gas emissions, the cost of fuel or our reliance on international oil and gas companies.”— 2023-08-22View Hansard

Opposed the bill as committee chair, arguing it was unworkable, unnecessary and potentially unconstitutional, and that penalising retailers would not increase consumer demand for E10.

“While I am not opposed to some of the sentiment underpinning this bill such as good outcomes for consumers and better outcomes for the environment, it was clear to the committee that this bill was unlikely to achieve all of those goals.”— 2023-08-22View Hansard

Opposed the bill as shadow minister, acknowledging its sound intent but citing concerns about practicality, unintended consequences for small retailers, potential inconsistencies with Commonwealth legislation and the bill becoming outdated given advancements in the biofuels industry.

“From the outset, I would like to say that this bill has sound intent. However, the LNP has concerns surrounding the practicality of the legislation and unintended consequences.”— 2023-08-22View Hansard

Opposed the bill, arguing the data shows average ethanol content already sits at about nine per cent so the bill addresses a problem that does not exist, and that the future lies in biofuels for aviation and electric vehicles rather than bigger fines on retailers.

“Therefore, the bill seeks to introduce into Queensland more regulation, red tape and costs for a problem that the data states does not exist.”— 2023-08-22View Hansard

Opposed the bill despite acknowledging its good intentions, expressing concern about additional regulation on small regional retailers, the reversal of the onus of proof, and disproportionate penalties when the problem lies with wholesalers rather than retailers.

“I congratulate the Katter party on bringing this to us—the intent is there—but I think it needs more work.”— 2023-08-22View Hansard

Opposed the bill on behalf of the government, arguing the proposals would harm consumers and small retailers, that the doubled penalties are excessive, and that the minimum content provisions would be unconstitutional as they conflict with Commonwealth fuel standards legislation.

“Ultimately, the proposals in the bill really take a hammer to consumers and a hammer to small and medium retailers.”— 2023-08-22View Hansard

Opposed the bill, expressing concern about supply-side controls and fines driving up fuel costs for regional Queenslanders, potential impacts on the grain-dependent feedlot industry, and inconsistencies with Commonwealth legislation.

“Fundamentally I am not a fan of supply side controls and fines to try to drive up consumer adoption of a particular product.”— 2023-08-22View Hansard

Opposed the bill, arguing the doubled penalties are excessive, the minimum ethanol content provisions would be unconstitutional, and that the New South Wales experience showed forcing motorists away from regular unleaded led to higher fuel costs.

“When New South Wales experimented with phasing out regular unleaded petrol without ethanol, what happened was that those motorists who could not or did not want to use E10 were forced to buy more expensive premium petrol.”— 2023-08-22View Hansard

Did not support the bill but acknowledged it highlights the government's failure to enforce the existing ethanol mandate, and expressed concerns about added red tape, increased fuel costs, and cross-border inconsistencies.

“I do thank Katter's Australian Party for bringing the bill to the House because it does highlight the failures of the current government and the lack of enforcement of their own rules with regard to the existing biofuels mandate.”— 2023-08-22View Hansard