Fuel Supply
Question
1) During the so called 'energy security' diplomatic trip across Asia in April this year, public reporting repeatedly described the objective as securing Australia's fuel supplies and obtaining fuel guarantees from regional partners. Can the department outline specifically what new, binding fuel commitments were obtained on this trip? 2) What enduring fuel supply 'guarantees' exist today that did not exist prior to the minister's discussions with regional partners on this trip? 3) Did any government-to-government agreement emerge from the trip that guarantees Australia access to fuel during a regional supply disruption? 4) If not, how would the department characterise the primary achievement of the trip - diplomatic engagement, commercial facilitation, political assurances, or guaranteed fuel-security arrangements? 5) Is it accurate to say that the trip improved Australia's relationships and communication channels but did not create legally binding fuel supply guarantees? 6) Public commentary at the time referenced Australia's food exports and LNG exports as part of Australia's bargaining position. What specific leverage did Australia rely upon during these discussions, what was the Government willing to cut off to our regional partners? 7) To what extent were Australia's LNG exports a practical source of leverage given much of that production is owned by private companies and committed under long-term commercial contracts? 8) Did the Government consider any mechanism that would allow it to redirect, prioritise or otherwise influence LNG exports during a fuel-security crisis and, if so, what practical effect would that have had? 9) Of the fuel supply announcements which were publicly attributed to the trip, which cargoes were secured as a result of diplomacy via government-to-government agreements and which were simply arranged through EFA as a commercial arrangement?
Answer
Please see attached answer.
Comments · 0
Please log in to post a comment.
Loading comments...