Background
The Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Benefit to Australia) Bill 2020 (the bill) is a proposal to benefit the Australian community through its ownership of Australia’s offshore petroleum.
Australia’s vast offshore petroleum reserves are the basis of huge profits for foreign-owned multinational oil and gas companies operating in offshore waters, but the recovery of petroleum brings little to no benefit to the owners, who are the Australian people.
The government appears to argue tax law should be the only means by which Australians benefit from their ownership of vast petroleum reserves in offshore waters. Little, sometimes no tax is collected from the removal of our petroleum assets from under the seabed, because of the poor design of our tax laws. Despite the recommendations of the Callaghan Review the government has been unwilling to amend the gas laws in any meaningful way.
In any case tax bills cannot be introduced in the Senate.
Australia is short of natural gas, despite its vast reserves. Australia needs natural gas for energy and as a raw material for the manufacture of fertilizers, chemicals, and plastics.
The bill provides the opportunity for more commonwealth-owned petroleum to be brought onshore forcing companies to pay to tax in Australia.
18 June 2021 public hearing
The Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Act 2006 (the Act) created two agencies, and both sent representatives to answer questions. The National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority's (NOPSEMA) senior legal adviser and head of corporate and financial advice attended by videoconference from Western Australia. There was no point in either attending in person in Canberra because neither of these individuals held positions which would make them primary decision makers under the Act. This meant that neither of the individuals were able to answer any questions on the day-to-day issues which would arise from my legislative proposal.
They were there, it seemed, to make it clear that no questions could be answered in relationship to the failures related to the oil and gas platform known as the Northern Endeavour and now costing the taxpayer $4 million dollars a week to maintain and up to a billion dollars in clean-up costs of the legacy subsea structures.
Mr Graham Waters, the Title Administrator at the National Offshore Petroleum Titles Administrator (NOPTA) attended in person, which was appreciated, as he is a decision maker under the Act. Mr Waters told the committee that the Ministers in the Joint Authorities made decisions on the rollover of retention leases.
In every case the Commonwealth Minister for Resources represents the Commonwealth in the relevant Joint Authority. Traditionally these ministers are from the National Party in the government coalition. It is a matter of public record that Woodside Energy and Santos hold gas leases directly or indirectly or through joint venture agreements. Additionally, they are corporate National Party members paying up to $55 000 a year for special access to National Party ministers. This actual or perceived conflict of interest is unacceptable.
No one person from NOPTA, NOPSEMA, or the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources offered a single example of how the proposed object clause in my bill would create the ‘unacceptable and unintended’ consequences stated in the Department’s submission to the March 2021 committee review.
The Act contains 22 references to ‘public interest’. The term ‘public interest’ is not defined and yet decision makers are asked to interpret the term. It seems none of the decision makers have a problem with ‘public interest’. This suggests none of them would have a problem with interpreting that the proposed object clause in the bill which is to ensure the exploration and recovery of petroleum assets is for the benefit of the Australian community.
Australia is often compared to Norway in respect of the benefits accrued to its people. Norway is the gold standard, having established a sovereign wealth fund from the exploration and recovery of its petroleum assets, while Australia holds the wooden spoon. The mystery is why the government will not act to benefit Australians by supporting this bill. At no stage have they explained their opposition to the bill.
Senator Pauline Hanson
Pauline Hanson's One Nation