Page 3041 - Week 10 - Thursday, 15 September 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
to lower fuel prices) by Christmas 1993; in the case of Burmah, to gain entry to the Canberra market on very good terms ...
"Very good terms" might be an understatement. The committee report does outline how good those terms really were and how it placed Burmah in a substantially better position than any other operator in the ACT. Mr Connolly admitted that. He said, "Yes, that is what I did. I did it in a hasty way; I did it without documentation". In fact, the committee report goes on:
There has been adverse comment about the failure to comprehensively document the process. The lack of documentation is unfortunate in that the handling of the Burmah Agreement showed a lack of concern for appropriate administrative process.
I do not think that is something the Minister should be proud of. If he believes that that is not in any way critical of the process that he went through, then I think the Minister should read again. There is then a committee recommendation that there should be higher standards of documentation and analysis of the options and so on, but it simply did not happen.
The Minister admitted that there was no financial analysis of the impact of Burmah's establishment in the marketplace. Nobody bothered because, quite simply, nobody cared. What the Minister cared about was getting lower fuel prices. If it happened to impact upon small business operators in Canberra and property owners in Canberra, then that was a means to an end and was quite okay, quite fine. Unfortunately, as the committee heard more and more evidence - and it is outlined at least in this document - it became obvious that Mr Connolly's comments when he first announced Burmah's opening were not right. He said, "I am going to take on the oil companies. I am going to force them to do something about the high cost of petrol in the ACT". I suspect that many a Minister from around Australia has said that. Many have failed, and unfortunately another one has failed, as the committee found. They found that, at best, the petrol companies have forked out $1.4m altogether. All of the rest has come out of the pockets of small business operators in the ACT.
That is what the committee found, and nobody actually disagreed with that. So, the comment that I made this morning I will continue to make. The ACT motorist, according to the Government, will save some $9m over a 12-month period. If that money or a percentage of that - - -
Mr Connolly: The ratepayers should give that $9m back to the industry, says Mrs Carnell.
MRS CARNELL: Certainly not back to the oil companies, Mr Connolly. I think everybody on the committee was acutely aware that it was the oil companies that were screwing this market, as they do just about every other one in Australia. The oil companies have not had to suffer at all. Those who have suffered are the small business operators. Those who, I am suggesting - as did the majority of the committee - should be compensated are the small business operators.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .