PRIVATE MEMBERS' BUSINESS

Ms ROBERTS (Pearce) (12:56): The incorporated speech read as follows— I would like to oppose this motion. While it notes real concerns about illicit tobacco, it misdiagnoses the cause and prescribes a dangerous cure that would hand organised crime a permanent foothold in our communities and reverse decades of public health progress. The motion treats falling excise revenue as evidence that high taxes are no longer effective without commensurate enforcement.

That is backwards. Revenue has collapsed because criminal syndicates have built a parallel, untaxed supply chain, not because Australians suddenly need cheaper legal cigarettes. Treasury and the Illicit Tobacco and E-cigarette Commissioner estimate that the illicit market now accounts for around 50 to 60 per cent of tobacco sales—with ABS estimates up to 80 per cent when all nicotine products are included—worth billions in untaxed profits that fund further crime.

Cutting excise to chase that lost revenue would legitimise the black market's price advantage and lock in criminal control. Australia's tobacco controls have saved lives. Daily smoking is at a record low, with 5.6 per cent of Australians aged 14 and over in 2025, down from 8.3 per cent in 2022-23.

Plain packaging, point-of-sale restrictions and sustained excise increases have driven that success. The motion's implied solution, slashing excise, would make nicotine cheaper and more accessible, risking a new generation of addiction. Health authorities, including the Cancer Council and Quit, warn that lowering price and legalising more nicotine products would unwind hard-won gains and increase harm.

We do not solve a crime problem by making a deadly product easier to buy. The motion rightly highlights firebombings and intimidation linked to illicit tobacco. In my own community and across Australia, families have watched illegal storefronts spread through shopping strips, with neighbouring bakeries, cafes and pharmacies caught in the crossfire.

But the answer is not to subsidise criminals by cutting their cost base; it is to dismantle their business model with stronger enforcement, proceeds-of-crime action, and coordinated national disruption. Since early 2024, the Albanese Labor government has invested hundreds of millions in border enforcement, appointed an Illicit Tobacco and E-cigarette Commissioner, and strengthened national coordination to seize large quantities of illicit cigarettes and vapes before they reach our streets.

The Combatting Illicit Tobacco Act 2026 expands investigative powers, raises penalties, and targets criminal profits because, if we take away the money, the cars, the warehouses and the laundering channels, the trade becomes unprofitable. That is how you break a cartel, not by cutting the tax that makes their product illegal in the first place. Proponents of excise cuts argue that it will smash the black market.

Evidence suggests otherwise. Criminal networks are agile. They can lower prices further and still undercut any reduced legal price, turning policy into a race to the bottom.

Meanwhile, they retain their distribution networks and may pivot to other illicit goods. The coalition's own modelling assumes an 80 per cent excise cut, a two-year trial and a massive enforcement surge, acknowledging that tax cuts alone will not work. If the solution were simply to cut excise, we would not need a $200 million enforcement surge on top of it.

Yes, excise forecasts have been downgraded. But that is precisely why we must double down on disruption at the border, shop closures, licensing reform, and asset confiscation. Every billion dollars we recover by shutting down illicit supply is a billion dollars denied to gangs that fund violence, money laundering, and other serious crime.

Surrendering public health policy to criminal pricing strategies would cost far more than lost revenue; it would cost lives. In Pearce, people want safe shopping centres, honest businesses, and confidence that the law means something. They do not want their local tobacconist competing with an illegal outlet run by a syndicate, nor do they want their kids targeted by unregulated nicotine products.

That is why I support the Albanese Labor government's approach: stronger penalties, better coordination, and relentless enforcement against the criminals, not concessions that make their trade easier. This House should not note this motion. It rewards failure, risks public health, and misunderstands the nature of organised crime.

We must confront illicit tobacco with the full force of the law, protect our communities, and preserve the health gains we have fought so hard to achieve. Thank you. Debate adjourned.