COMMITTEES

Senator DEAN SMITH (Western Australia) (18:01): I'm privileged to make a slightly calmer and more rational contribution to the very important issue contained in this report. The Australian Greens and Independents have sought to hijack what is a genuine sentiment in our country. That genuine sentiment is for a fairer return for Australians from the extraction of our natural resources.

Indeed, in my home state of Western Australia this is a growing sentiment. It's been hijacked by the Australian Greens and Independent senators because they want to use it as camouflage for their desire to end fossil fuels. Contrary to the contribution of the senator before me, the enthusiasm for the campaign is running out of steam—excuse the pun.

This report confirms what the coalition has said from the outset: Australia does not need a reckless new gas tax, and Australia needs more gas supply, more investment and more energy security. The Greens and Senator Pocock came to this inquiry with a prewritten answer to tax gas harder, punish investment and dress up an antigas campaign as tax reform. The coalition's position has been clear and consistent: no arbitrary windfall levy, no retrospective tax grab and no policy that risks jobs, investment, regional communities or Australia's reputation as a reliable energy supplier, especially not at this critical geopolitical time.

The PRRT is working. It was consciously designed to tax profits once major high-risk projects recover their enormous upfront costs. That is exactly what is happening.

The industry is already paying its required tax. Australian Energy Producers has confirmed that the oil and gas industry contributed $21.9 billion last year and remains the second-highest corporate taxpayer in Australia. The Australian Taxation Office evidence also corrected the false claim made by the Greens and Independent senators that gas companies are not paying tax.

Corporate tax paid by oil and gas reached $10.4 billion in 2023-24. The Prime Minister himself rejected the dishonest claim that gas is being exported tax free. Labor has not backed the Greens position, because even Labor knows the numbers do not support it.

But let's wait and see exactly what Labor might do in coming months or the next year. This is the political reality. The Greens and Senator Pocock are isolated, and their campaign has more to do with shutting down gas than with improving the tax system.

A 25 per cent export levy would not be modest. Wood Mackenzie's analysis found it could push effective tax rates above 80 per cent, reduce project value by up to 94 per cent and put future production and revenue at risk. You do not increase tax revenue by making projects 'uninvestable'.

You increase revenue by getting projects approved, attracting capital, producing more gas and keeping Australia competitive. Woodside, Chevron, INPEX and Santos all made the same basic point. Investors made multibillion dollar decisions in good faith under existing rules, and changing those rules again so soon after the 2023 PRRT reforms would damage Australia's reputation.

INPEX described the 2023 reforms as a handshake that meant pens down on the PRRT. Instead, only a few years later, the industry has been dragged back into a politically driven tax debate. Chevron warned that frequent tax reviews create fiscal instability.

Woodside said the PRRT does work. Santos said retrospective changes should not be supported. That spells danger for gas exploration, gas production and jobs in the gas industry in Australia.

We have heard the Greens and others talk about Norway but they ignore the basic difference. Norway coinvests with industry and shares the risk. Australia relies on private capital.

You cannot copy Norway's tax rate while refusing to copy Norway's investment model. This inquiry has also exposed the activist agenda behind the campaign. Some submitters were not arguing for better tax design; they were arguing to stop new gas projects altogether.

Senator Faruqi: Yes. Senator DEAN SMITH: Yes, says Senator Faruqi—sprung! That matters because gas is not another industry; it underpins manufacturing, jobs, exports, household energy reliability and the energy security of key partners including Japan and Korea.

Japan's warning should be taken seriously. Australia's LNG reputation has been built over decades. Surprise retrospective taxes would send exactly the wrong message to our closest trading partners.

Regional communities know what the activists ignore. In places like Onslow, in my home state of Western Australia, the gas sector delivered jobs, infrastructure, local business opportunities and long-term community investment. The coalition's recommendation is simple and responsible: there should be no arbitrary windfall levy on gas exports.

Australia needs an increased tax take, not an increased tax rate. That means encouraging investment, approving projects faster, reducing duplication, and backing the sector that helps pay for the services Australians rely on. The Greens and Senator Pocock have a different ambition.

Their ambition is not tax reform; their ambition is to punish the industry. The coalition wants the industry to keep investing, keep employing, keep exporting and keep paying tax in Australia. If I might just go back to where I started, there is in this country and in my own home state of Western Australia genuine sentiment that people want to see more of the value return to their local communities.

That is a national interest. The question will soon become: what is the best way to do that that does not imperil future investment, that does not imperil our trading relationships, that does not imperil the future investment in local community?