Transport Infrastructure

Opened the debate

Pocock argued that rising fuel prices and shortages required urgent demand-side solutions, including cheaper or free public transport and improved cycling infrastructure. Pocock stated that these measures would help metropolitan commuters and free up diesel for regional farmers. Pocock urged the Commonwealth to collaborate with state and territory authorities to subsidise fares and implement emergency actions such as pop-up bike lanes. Pocock emphasised that many Australians were willing to use public transport if it were more affordable.

Government response

Chisholm defended the government's record, listing immediate actions such as empowering the ACCC, releasing fuel stockpiles, and amending fuel standards. Chisholm highlighted significant federal investments in public transport infrastructure, including billions for projects in Canberra, Perth, Sydney, and Melbourne. Chisholm argued that the government was addressing both immediate fuel challenges and long-term infrastructure needs through constructive cooperation with states. Chisholm rejected the motion as a political stunt and criticised the opposition for supporting it.

Opposition response

McKenzie stated that the coalition supported the motion to highlight the need for all levels of government to assist with the fuel crisis. McKenzie argued that public transport and active travel projects are the purview of state and territory governments, not the federal government. McKenzie called for the federal government to focus on supply chain issues, ethanol mandates, and potential GST relief for the trucking industry. McKenzie criticised the government for blaming consumers for panic buying instead of addressing systemic supply issues.