I am delighted to contribute to the debate on this topic. Obviously there are three parts to the motion. The first expresses concern about petrol prices. Everyone is concerned about petrol prices. The member for Burrinjuck said that during the last week the price of petrol was $1.43 at Young, and the honourable member for Bega made the point that it is now up to about $1.49. So right across the state people are concerned about petrol prices. But the situation has not changed in recent years: it is a concern we have all spoken about for some time.

I am delighted to contribute to the debate on this topic. Obviously there are three parts to the motion. The first expresses concern about petrol prices. Everyone is concerned about petrol prices. The member for Burrinjuck said that during the last week the price of petrol was $1.43 at Young, and the honourable member for Bega made the point that it is now up to about $1.49. So right across the state people are concerned about petrol prices. But the situation has not changed in recent years: it is a concern we have all spoken about for some time.

 With regard to the third paragraph of the motion, which calls on the Federal Government to strengthen the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission's powers to police fuel prices, we would all like to see the commission's powers strengthened. There is no doubt about that at all; the point has been discussed at great length publicly for some time. If there is a way to do that, I am sure you can suggest it and it will be taken up. I believe this motion is really about the second paragraph, which calls on the House to commend the Iemma Government's introduction of a minimum ethanol mandate of 2 per cent. Anyone who is familiar with this topic would realise that that amounts to back-pedalling on Morris Iemma's commitment.

This motion is about Morris Iemma back-pedalling on a pre-election commitment to alternative fuels. It was a commitment made by Morris Iemma after we had pushed him for a year on the need for New South Wales to show some leadership in taking up the issue of alternative fuels, especially ethanol. But he did not do it. Finally, a month before the election, the Premier made a half-hearted commitment to embrace a plan for ethanol in the future. That plan extended to taking ethanol usage to 10 per cent by 2011. The motion makes no mention of 10 per cent ethanol usage in New South Wales by 2011; it simply refers to a minimum ethanol mandate of 2 per cent this year. This motion is about another back-pedalling by Morris Iemma on a key issue. Ethanol is a win-win situation for so many people. It is important that we hold the Government to its original commitment, which was for 10 per cent ethanol usage by 2011.

Members will remember that on 14 February, when the Labor Party finally committed to embracing ethanol, we congratulated the Government on doing that. Now it needs to embrace the rest of the policy I proposed over the last year. At that time I made a number of points, and I called on the Labor Party to follow them up. I called for $5 million for grants to assist existing service stations convert their infrastructure to allow the sale of ethanol-blended fuel. The Government has not done that. I called for $1 million for a marketing plan, in co-operation with the NRMA and environmental groups, to promote alternative fuels, especially ethanol. I called for the mandatory use of E10 fuel in all State Government vehicles where possible. We know that that is not happening and that it is an option that the Government could have pursued at any time over recent years because E10 has been widely available, especially in metropolitan areas—indeed, right across the state—for a number of years. I also called for mandating, if necessary, ethanol usage in New South Wales to 10 per cent by 2011.

I converted my car to 85 per cent ethanol last year. I have run it on a blend of 85 per cent ethanol and 15 per cent unleaded fuel since mid last year, and it runs perfectly well. The Government could show leadership on that as well, by converting the Premier's car to 85 per cent ethanol. Has the Government done that? No. It has spoken about government fleets using 10 per cent ethanol, or E10. But is that happening? No, not at all. The former Minister for the Environment played with the concept of hybrid cars, but this Government simply has not embraced alternative fuels in any serious way, and clearly it does not intend to. The motion tells us that the Government is back-pedalling on the 10 per cent, that it intends to wind it down to the minimum it can get away with, 2 per cent ethanol use.

I think I am correct in saying—and the Minister may like to correct me—that we have not yet seen a bill to introduce 2 per cent ethanol use. The Government is talking about it, but it is simply not doing it. That is what we have seen from the Government year after year, and obviously it simply will not change the way it operates. That is the real problem here. We see this extraordinary hypocrisy not only from State Labor but from Kevin Rudd every single day. We can achieve a lot on this issue.

The Minister spoke about this issue being of the utmost priority. It is. But what is of even greater priority is for the Minister to do something, rather than just whinge about it. Day after day in this place, every Government motion that is sought to be accorded priority has been about trying to blame something on the Federal Government. The New South Wales Government needs to have a look at its lack of action, on this issue and other issues, and do something about it. As we indicated in the lead-up to the election, if the Government adopts our policies we will applaud it. We laid out a framework of policies that will address the problems in New South Wales. Our policies will fix the problems, and we have no difficulty about the Government adopting them.

As I said, the Government half-heartedly adopted our ethanol policy, and on 14 February we called on it to take on board the rest of it. The Government has another opportunity to do that today. The Premier is back-pedalling on the ethanol issue. I suggest that he not do that. It is an issue of concern not only for motorists but for anyone breathing the air, especially in metropolitan areas. The Premier should have a look at the pollution report tabled in the upper House in November last year. The report spoke about the quality of the air in New South Wales, especially in metropolitan Sydney. It is a major problem.

Ethanol use produces a 30 per cent reduction in harmful pollutants. It is worthwhile. Obviously, increasing ethanol usage to 10 per cent by 2011 would make a significant difference, and operating a car on 85 per cent ethanol, as I do, would make an even greater difference. It would result in a dramatic improvement in the quality of the air we breathe. Clearly, it would also have an impact on the health costs for our community. These are all things the New South Wales Government could do. It does not have to complain about the Federal Government; it does not have to, day after day, find another issue on which to use John Howard as a punching bag. The New South Wales Government can choose the issues and do something about them itself. As I have said, we laid out the framework for the Government.

I am very concerned that the Government is back-pedalling on its ethanol commitment. We need to see in this House a bill for a minimum ethanol mandate of 2 per cent as quickly as possible, and we need the Government to restate its commitment to 10 per cent ethanol usage as soon as possible, with a clear plan of how to achieve it. We laid out the framework, but the Government has not yet done that. We would also like the Government to convert the government fleet to using E10 fuel across the state. It is simply necessary for the Government fleet to fill up at service stations that have E10 fuel, which are everywhere. The Government is simply not making it happen. The Government also needs to look at a marketing plan for alternative fuels, especially ethanol, and it needs to do that in the short term. It also needs to look at providing funding for service stations to convert their infrastructure to allow the sale of ethanol-blended fuel.

We need to make sure that the Labor Party no longer attacks ethanol use. One of the problems we saw over recent years was that the Labor Party—probably acting in concert with the oil companies—decided to run an undermining campaign against alternative fuels. That was extremely regrettable, and there is now general agreement that ethanol is very good for our community. Let us see the Labor Party really embrace ethanol use, get behind it, and promote it in the way we have suggested, the way we have laid out in our ethanol policy. I again emphasise that we laid out the Coalition's plan for alternative fuels and ethanol after a series of meetings with the oil companies, the ethanol companies, environmental groups and motoring groups. There was absolute agreement on what needed to be done in New South Wales to take a leadership role on this issue. The issue now before the Minister and the Premier is simply: Are you up to it?