Matter of Public Importance

Fuel

Senate · Monday 23 March 2026

Official Hansard for this day (APH) · Read this debate on OpenAustralia

At a glance

The Senate debated a motion of public importance regarding the government's handling of fuel supply disruptions linked to Middle East tensions. The opposition argued that the government failed to prepare for global shocks, leading to shortages that impacted farmers and businesses, while also blaming environmental regulations for long-term supply constraints. Government senators countered that the crisis was driven by panic buying rather than supply failure, highlighting actions such as releasing reserves and establishing a taskforce. Other speakers criticised the government's response as inadequate or hypocritical, with some linking the price rises to support for foreign conflict.

Outcome

The motion was passed by 27 votes to 21.

Summary in reported speech - not a transcript. AI-generated, so check the official record before quoting.

How the debate unfolded

Opened the debate

Bridget McKenzie (VIC) (National Party) Nationals

McKenzie argued that the government demonstrated incompetence by failing to prepare for fuel supply disruptions caused by the Middle East conflict. McKenzie claimed that assurances of adequate supply misled the public, resulting in shortages that prevented farmers from harvesting and increased diesel costs by 80 cents per litre. McKenzie stated that the government refused to use available powers to intervene in the market or support biofuel production. McKenzie contended that the release of 100 million litres of fuel was insufficient given the daily national requirement of 135.6 million litres.

Government response

Corinne Mulholland (QLD) (Australian Labor Party) ALP

Mulholland argued that the motion was a political distraction and that Australia's fuel supply remained secure despite global instability. Mulholland highlighted government actions including releasing 20 per cent of diesel reserves, amending fuel standards, and appointing a Fuel Supply Taskforce Coordinator to manage distribution. Mulholland attributed the current vulnerability to previous Coalition decisions that closed domestic refineries, noting that the remaining Ampol refinery in Queensland was operating at capacity. Mulholland emphasised that the government was cracking down on price gouging and supporting workers who maintained supply chains.

Opposition response

Andrew Bragg (NSW) (Liberal Party) Liberal

Bragg argued that the fuel shortage stemmed from the government's failure to facilitate resource development through environmental approvals. Bragg claimed that delays in projects such as the Browse and North West Shelf developments reduced domestic gas and condensate oil supply. Bragg criticised the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation laws for creating uncertainty and granting excessive power to the minister, which he said hindered essential resource projects. Bragg asserted that Australia should have secured more domestic energy resources to avoid reliance on unreliable global supply chains.

Nick McKim (TAS) (Australian Greens) Greens oppose

McKim argued that fuel price increases were a direct consequence of major parties supporting conflict in the Middle East. McKim stated that opposing the war and calling for peace were the only effective ways to address rising petrol costs. McKim criticised all major parties for cheering on the conflict while complaining about the economic impact on Australians.
Pauline Hanson (QLD) (Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) One Nation support

Hanson argued that the government failed to maintain the internationally mandated 90-day fuel stockpile, risking national transport and defence capabilities. Hanson claimed the government provided contradictory information regarding ship arrivals and fuel availability, demonstrating poor crisis management. Hanson stated that the government's suggestion to work from home was impractical for essential workers and that domestic resource extraction was needed.
Dorinda Cox (WA) (Australian Labor Party) ALP oppose

Cox argued that the disruptions were localised demand spikes caused by panic buying rather than a supply failure. Cox highlighted that the government had released 20 per cent of baseline stockholdings and established a taskforce led by Anthea Harris to coordinate distribution. Cox stated that fuel was held domestically and that the government was empowering the ACCC to prevent unfair price rises.
Fatima Payman (WA) (Australia's Voice) Australia's Voice oppose

Payman expressed relief at the appointment of a fuel taskforce but questioned whether it addressed underlying issues such as the transition to renewables or domestic refining capacity. Payman noted that petrol prices in Perth had risen significantly and that some service stations were implementing purchase limits. Payman urged the Treasurer to consider the impact of fuel excise on households in the upcoming budget.
Slade Brockman (WA) (DPRES) DPRES support

Brockman argued that the government was aware of potential supply shocks but failed to act, instead blaming consumers for filling their tanks. Brockman stated that force majeure clauses had already been triggered by suppliers in Singapore, indicating early signs of disruption. Brockman claimed that the previous government had secured fuel reserves in Texas at no cost and that the current response was ineffective.

Votes during this debate

Division 19: Fuel Passed 27–21

Opened by

Bridget McKenzie (VIC) (National Party)

Nationals

Speeches

9 speeches, 5 other contributors

Topics

Agriculture Environment & Water Fuel Security Middle East

Debate Tasmania: Salmon Farming Industry Take Note Debate, 8 Sep 2026 · Shared topics: Agriculture, Environment & Water
Debate Waste Management and Recycling: Plastic Packaging Take Note Debate, 15 Sep 2026 · Shared topic: Environment & Water
Question Time Senate Question Time 30 Jun 2026 · Shared topics: Agriculture, Environment & Water
Question Time Senate Question Time 29 Jun 2026 · Shared topics: Agriculture, Fuel Security

About Senate debates

The Senate debates bills, motions, matters of public importance and the answers given in Question Time. Senators from all parties and the crossbench take part, and a minister or the minister representing them usually replies for the government. Summaries are in reported speech, not transcripts; always check the official record before quoting.