Two men in suits stand at microphones outdoors. The man on the left, wearing glasses, looks intently at the man on the right, who is speaking. A blue vertical sidebar on the left reads "THE BULLETIN.
Anthony Albanese and Christopher Luxon at a press conference in Queenstown, August 9, 2025. (Photo: Hagen Hopkins/Getty Images)

The Bulletinabout 10 hours ago

Why isn’t NZ copying Australia’s approach to the fuel crisis?

Contributing writer
Two men in suits stand at microphones outdoors. The man on the left, wearing glasses, looks intently at the man on the right, who is speaking. A blue vertical sidebar on the left reads "THE BULLETIN.
Anthony Albanese and Christopher Luxon at a press conference in Queenstown, August 9, 2025. (Photo: Hagen Hopkins/Getty Images)
newsletter

Australia has halved its fuel tax, moved to level two of its response plan, and sent its prime minister on a fuel-security tour of Asia. New Zealand has done none of these things. Does that matter, asks Catherine McGregor in today’s excerpt from The Bulletin.

To receive The Bulletin in full each weekday, sign up here.

Willis at the White House

Yesterday’s fuel stocks update showed levels dropping for the second week running – down three to four days across each fuel type, leaving New Zealand with less than three weeks of diesel. The government is staying at phase one, with MBIE advising that the decrease in stocks does “not raise any immediate concerns”. Simplicity chief economist Shamubeel Eaqub was less relaxed. He believes phase two is warranted, and told RNZ the government’s failure to provide any detail on how rationing would work was “extraordinarily flat-footed”, adding: “We’ve had so much time to prepare. It really quite reeks of limited competence in terms of how they could communicate in a state of quite heightened uncertainty with the public.”

Overnight, finance minister Nicola Willis met with officials at the White House. The meeting was arranged, she told Henry Cooke at The Post, to put New Zealand’s fuel dependency “on their radar” and ask the US administration how long it expected the economy to take to return to normal. She’s in Washington DC for the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank spring meetings.

How Australia’s approach differs

The decision to stay in phase one has renewed comparisons with Australia, which is already at level two of its national fuel plan. Anthony Albanese has halved the excise tax on fuel, removed the heavy-vehicle road user charge and personally flown to Singapore, Malaysia and Brunei for discussions on securing fuel. Christopher Luxon has provided a $50-a-week payment to around 143,000 families, raising mileage rates for home support workers, and is increasing diesel storage.

In his paywalled Post column on the topic, Cooke notes some key factors to take into consideration: Australia entered the crisis with an economy growing roughly twice as fast as NZ, substantially lower government debt as a share of GDP, and the advantage of being a major net energy exporter through coal and gas. Where on the political spectrum the two leaders sit also matters, Cooke writes. “Albanese appears scared of being seen to do too little… Luxon seems scared of doing too much.”

Food for fuel

One area where Luxon has moved decisively, and the reason he likes to say Australia is “playing catch-up” with NZ, is a trade agreement with Singapore that an official describes as “possibly unique in the world”. As Fran O’Sullivan writes in the NZ Herald (paywalled), the agreement  – to be formally signed when Luxon visits Singapore in early May, though both sides are already treating it as in force – sees both countries waive their right to impose export restrictions on the other in a crisis. “Under World Trade Organisation rules and most free trade agreements, countries can suspend obligations and block exports to protect domestic needs,” O’Sullivan explains. “Under this deal, Wellington cannot do that to Singapore – and Singapore cannot do it to New Zealand.” Each side has identified critical products it fears running short of: New Zealand’s include medical supplies and fuel; Singapore’s are food products such as seafood and dairy.

“For Singapore, the logic is simple: if New Zealand cannot get fuel and diesel, it cannot produce food,” O’Sullivan writes. “For New Zealand, tying itself into Singapore’s highly connected energy and logistics hub vastly improves its chances of staying supplied when markets seize up.”

The free transport question

Victoria and Tasmania have already scrapped public transport fares in response to the fuel crisis. Should New Zealand follow suit? The Spinoff’s Emma Gleason lays out the case on both sides. The pro argument rests largely on speed: University of Auckland transport expert Timothy Welch calls it the fastest available lever for getting people out of their cars and notes that once people start using free or cheaper public transport, studies show a portion tend to stick with it after fares return to normal.

One of the main cons is that it’s simply unlikely to work. Waka Kotahi data shows cost isn’t even in the top five barriers to using public transport: availability and access rank far higher.