Fuel tax credits aren't the problem: budget failure, bureaucratic bloat, and the Net Zero Cult are

Let me be clear up front: I am aware that, at this stage, farming and commercial fishing are not the stated target of the current fuel tax credits review conversation.

But we have heard that line before, and it seldom ends well for us.

When Canberra starts talking about “the viability and value” of a scheme, it rarely stays neatly confined to one corner of the economy. There is now a formal inquiry process looking at the fuel tax credits scheme more broadly, and there are already recommendations floating around to phase out fuel tax credits for on-road heavy vehicle use.

That might sound narrow. It rarely stays narrow.

Fuel tax credits and commercial fishing: why we are watching this closely

Fuel tax credits exist because fuel excise is largely designed around road transport. If you are burning fuel in an activity that is not using public roads, the intent is simple: you should not be paying a tax designed to maintain roads you are not driving on.

Commercial fishing vessels do not travel on public roads. We are not wearing out the highway with a trawler.

So when politicians hint that fuel tax credits are a “subsidy” to be harvested for savings, it is either ignorance or narrative-building.

This is not a special perk. Fuel tax credits are a correction for a tax system that was never meant to treat off-road and marine users as road users.

Liberal and Labor keep proving they cannot manage a budget

Here is the hard truth: neither Liberal nor Labor have shown they can manage a budget or the economy at large. The pattern is consistent:

1. Spend big.

2. Borrow more.

3. Ignore structural waste.

4. Then go hunting for “savings” where the politics are easiest.

And while they posture about tightening belts, the deficit and debt trend keeps rolling on. That is why the temptation exists to go after things like fuel tax credits. It is easier to squeeze the productive economy than it is to fix government’s own mess.

If the major parties were serious about fiscal discipline, the first question would not be “what can we cut from industry?” It would be “what are we funding inside government that is bloated, duplicative, or failing?”

Start with the bloated bureaucracy and its pay scales

Why are taxpayers funding a system where senior bureaucrats are earning $500,000 to over $900,000 a year, while police, nurses and teachers live paycheck to paycheck?

At the federal level, departmental secretaries take home close to or above $900,000, while deputy secretaries earn between $500,000 and $700,000 depending on role and department.

In NSW and other states, senior public sector executives routinely earn between $360,000 and $580,000, not including benefits or job security perks.

This is a machine that rewards itself no matter the outcome. More layers, more assistants, more spin. No accountability.

If government wants to make hard choices, it should start by:

• Freezing senior bureaucrat salaries

• Capping executive bonuses and perks

• Tying performance to real outcomes, not job titles

Do not tell the public there's no money while lavishing top bureaucrats with executive luxury. And do not go after fuel tax credits while the waste sits in plain sight.

Stop borrowing to fund fraud, waste, and failed integrity

While everyday Australians are told to accept less, we keep seeing integrity failures and leakage across major programs.

Billions flow through systems that are weakly policed, poorly monitored, and frequently rorted. Then, instead of taking a hard line, governments announce more “reviews”, more funding to administer the same broken system, and more public relations.

It is indefensible to chase working industries over fuel tax credits while tolerating program leakage measured in the tens or hundreds of millions.

If government wants genuine savings, it should harden compliance, prosecute fraud properly, recover stolen funds, and fix the incentives that allow rorts to flourish.

The Net Zero Cult obsession is warping priorities

The Net Zero Cult has become a political obsession that distorts priorities. In that worldview, fuel tax credits become a tempting ideological target because “cutting fossil fuel support” sounds good in a press release.

But commercial fishing is not an emissions policy loophole. It is food production. And fuel tax credits exist because our vessels do not use public roads.

If government wants to debate emissions policy, debate it honestly. Do not use ideology as cover to raid mechanisms that exist for legitimate structural reasons, then pretend it is “reform”.

Fuel tax credits should not be the scapegoat for government failure

If government wants budget repair, start here:

• cap and cut senior bureaucratic pay growth

• reduce bureaucratic sprawl and duplicate agencies

• stop funding failure and call it “investment”

• enforce program integrity properly: tighten controls, prosecute fraud, recover money

• stop normalising deficits and pretending borrowed money is free

And leave fuel tax credits alone for sectors like commercial fishing, where the logic is simple: we do not operate on public roads, and we should not be treated like we do.

Final word

Today it is “not about fishing”. Tomorrow it is “just a tweak”. Then it is “shared sacrifice”.

We have seen this movie.

Commercial fishing is already under pressure from closures, red tape, rising costs, and policy experiments that ignore reality on the water. Fuel tax credits are not some luxury item to strip out for a headline. They are part of what keeps Australian seafood viable in an economy that is increasingly hostile to local production.

If government wants real savings, it should stop punching down at productive industries and start cutting the waste inside its own walls.

Buy