Mr McARTHUR (4:00 PM) —I am delighted to participate in this debate. The member for Gellibrand is part of the ALP—a party that put up taxes during the 13 years it was in government yet comes to this House arguing about 1.3c per litre. As the minister formerly at the table mentioned, the price rises under the ALP during its time in government were extraordinary. Let us get this whole argument in perspective. People in business will receive a reduction in their excise and a reduction for their inputs under the GST. Those members opposite are claiming that fuel prices will rise. They are saying that there will be increased taxation of petrol arising from the GST. Let me put it to you quite clearly and categorically that those small business men and women and big businesses around Australia will in fact pay reduced costs for their fuel, petrol and diesel from Saturday, 1 July and thereon in. This is the biggest price reduction in fuel that any government has ever undertaken.

We had an argument about this at question time in the parliament and we have it during the MPI. The member for Gellibrand is now leaving, and, of course, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition leaves as well. That is how keen they are about the argument. That is right; they are leaving. We have about three of their stalwarts left: one from Brisbane, one from Melbourne—who knows about the competition in Melbourne—and the member for Tasmania, and Tasmania is subsidised anyway. As he well knows, Tasmania is subsidised on fuel prices. In essence, this argument is about the allocation of 1.3c, which—as the Prime Minister reiterated at question time today and yesterday—is about the embedded costs that those petrol companies should pass on, as Woolworths will pass on savings to their consumers from 1 July. What is different about the petrol companies? I agree that they are in a fairly competitive situation, but why shouldn't they pass on those savings? I make the point that petrol and diesel prices will remain the same because of government changes and that consumers who are not in business will be receiving a $12 billion tax cut. Even the member for Melbourne Ports understands that. Even you can comprehend the tax cuts that are coming in on Saturday. You have never given a tax cut in your life, as a member of the ALP. People will have better purchasing power as domestic consumers to purchase their petrol. The government are exactly on line with the proposition that they put before the Australian people at the last election.

I make the point quite categorically that transport operators, the truckers of Australia, will be receiving a reduction of 24c per litre in their excise. I repeat that—24c. That reduction will obviously be a major factor in their profitability, and this government had the courage to introduce that major cost reduction. In a recent announcement, the federal Treasurer and the government have said that unleaded petrol would be 37.481c. That is the new excise rate for unleaded petrol from 1 July 2000—a reduction of 6.7c per litre. The argument that we see in this parliament is about 1.3c and 1.5c. As the Prime Minister has said on a number of occasions, these figures were worked out on a price of about 90c per litre, and yet today I think the price is at 85c. So the motorists and the consumers in Australia are enjoying a cost reduction no matter which way you look at it. Obviously, those oil companies should pass on their fair share of the reductions that they will receive on their diesel transport costs, a reduction that is quite significant to country Victoria and to their own internal operations.

On the key argument that the minister referred to, I reiterate the point that, during the Hawke and Keating governments, the Labor Party quietly put up their taxes at midnight. Some of the members opposite were not here during that period, so let me go over that for you. Prior to the 1993 budget, the wholesale sales tax rates were roughly 10 per cent for household goods, 20 per cent for the general rate and 30 per cent for luxury goods. Everyone understood that. But after the 1993 budget, they went up to 11 per cent, 21 per cent and 31 per cent. Not only that, in 1995 they went up yet another one per cent, to 12 per cent, 22 per cent and 32 per cent. Those members opposite conveniently forget that, and the shadow minister at the table would forget it because he was part of the government—he did not mind putting up these taxes at one minute to midnight.

Let us look at these excise figures which, again, members opposite conveniently overlook. On budget night 1993, the excise applicable to diesel, leaded and unleaded petrols increased by 3c a litre overnight. Just like that! Then, on 2 February 1994, diesel and unleaded petrols increased by another one cent. It is not a big figure; it is just enough to raise $400 million. Nothing was said. No compensation was given. No tax cuts were given to average Australia. Then, on 1 August 1994, it increased by a further 1c per litre. On 2 February 1994, unleaded petrol was increased by 2c per litre, and on 1 August 1994 it was increased by a further 2c per litre. The key element of this whole increase was that it was on top of the indexation. I remind members opposite that they, as a government, introduced this indexation concept. Not only did they index the price of fuel but they added their own extra cost. And yet they come into this House and argue about 1.3c, which should be paid for by the oil companies because they are liable and they have enjoyed price cuts.

Let me draw another matter to the attention of the House and those members of the public who are concerned about petrol prices—and all of us are. The member for Cowper is concerned about petrol prices in his electorate, and the member for Ballarat is very concerned about petrol prices. The fundamental reason for the petrol price increase, as the minister for the table alluded to, is the dramatic price rise in Texas crude by the OPEC countries. Let us get the figures: in December 1998 the price of Texas crude was in the range of $US10 a barrel, by July 1999 it moved to approximately $US20 and by June this year it is in the range of $US25 to $US28 a barrel. All our constituents and all our consumers are fundamentally concerned about the conversion of that Texas crude price to the price at the pump, which is in the range of 75c to 85c, depending on what part of the country you are in.

That brings me to the point where we get to the age-old argument which my very good colleague the member for Indi has run in this parliament on the price range of petrol in country and city. The oil companies are running the argument in the press over the last 48 hours that they are unable to find 1.3c or 1.5c; they are unable to find it when we have given them the option and the capacity to reduce their price from 1 July. Let us have a look at the price of fuel in Colac and in Geelong in the wonderful electorate of Corangamite. I have never been able to explain to the electors why there is this variation of price. We have unleaded petrol in Colac at 89.9c today; we have just checked it out today. But in Geelong it is 81.5c—8.4c less than Colac. That is about 45 kilometres, about an hour's journey. After 1 July transport will be a lot less because the diesel for the truck that carries the fuel will cost a lot less. So we have the situation where the oil companies are arguing the toss over 1.3c. They can have a price war in metropolitan Melbourne of 8c to 10c, sometimes 15c, to gain business at those metropolitan stations, particularly in Melbourne compared to other states, and where they can discount petrol in Geelong as compared with Colac, and yet they come to this parliament and to the government saying, `Look, we can't afford 1.3c to 1.5c.'

Mr Lieberman —The opposition are supporting them.

Mr McARTHUR —As the member for Indi quite rightly points out, the opposition, remarkably enough, are supporting the big oil companies. I have not noticed them do that in the past. So we have a situation where fundamentally, with all the discounts and deductions the government have given in the budget papers and will be giving after 1 July, the government are receiving approximately the same revenue with the discounted arrangements. Members cannot in any shape or form discount the 10 per cent for businesses that have fuel as an input and the 24c for diesel for big truck operators. That has been on the table. That is a fact of life, and the government are receiving revenues approximately the same, with those discounts. I would just like to point out that, of that approximately $12.7 billion, $6 billion goes to road funding throughout the Commonwealth.

I conclude by saying that the ALP were a big-taxing government during their 13 years in government, and yet they come to this House arguing the toss over 1.3c. They implemented so-called tax cuts in l-a-w, and what happened to those tax cuts is that they were immediately removed. There was no compensation and there was no help to those Australian consumers, as there will be on 1 July. (Time expired)

Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Jenkins)—Order! The discussion is now concluded.