Kay Hull (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

Let us be under no illusion. The real purpose behind the Nation Building Program (National Land Transport) Amendment Bill 2009 and this waste of money, time and resources is the government’s attempt to mislead the public into believing that AusLink expenditure committed by the coalition two years ago is new infrastructure spending. However, the government’s proposal to scrap the name AusLink and replace it, at great expense, with the Nation Building Program term, has some fine details which are of grave concern to regional Australia and which should be of grave concern to those regional members of the Labor Party government.

Once again, this Labor government is abandoning our regional Australia. This bill will allow the AusLink strategic regional projects, now termed the Nation Building Program Off-Network Project, to be funded in places that are not in regional areas. When it was in government, the coalition understood the importance of allocating specific funds to meet the needs of regional Australia. Now this government has introduced a bill that abolishes the AusLink strategic regional project category and replaces it with the Nation Building Program Off-Network Project. This is just a smokescreen to again attack the heart of regional Australia.

It was, in fact, the coalition that established this AusLink program. It is not a Labor program. In order to establish that smokescreen, it is probably the government’s intention to change the name so that it can try to rebadge it as its own. You often see that happening with cars that have come from a particular car maker—a second car maker tries to rebadge a car as if it were its own. You have now seen the Labor Party rebadge a program to try to make out that the program was its own. But the one thing that it did not want to rebadge as its own was any support for regional Australia; should we be surprised?

The coalition developed Australia’s first national land transport plan since Federation and the means by which the federal, state and territory governments work together to develop a single, integrated national land transport network. Under AusLink, the coalition government spent more on nation building than any other Commonwealth government since Federation. The coalition allocated over $15 billion over the five-year period from 2004-05 to 2008-09. In terms of AusLink, too, the former government, in 2007-08, pledged to invest $31 billion in transport infrastructure.

The major duplication of the Hume Highway was funded during the 2004-05 to 2008-09 years. The former government’s funding plan was money in the bank, especially for the New South Wales RTA, to go ahead and do these works—for example the Coolac bypass and the duplication of the Sheehan Bridge in Gundagai. Last week, we were fortunate enough to open the duplicated Sheehan Bridge in Gundagai. I welcomed Minister Anthony Albanese into the electorate of Riverina in order to open this real term infrastructure project, not a sod-turning to depict infrastructure that might come in the future but an actual delivery of infrastructure that happened under the coalition.

As I have said in this House before, there is argy-bargy on both sides of politics. The duplication of the Sheehan Bridge was commissioned and paid for by the former coalition government and opened by the minister under this government, who declared it part of Labor’s Nation Building Program. But the one good thing that will happen as a result of this project is that it will benefit the people. I am not going to be out there screaming and shouting that minister Anthony Albanese came in and opened up a project, labelling it a Labor Nation Building Infrastructure Project when, in fact, it was not; I am going to be welcoming the minister here, saying, ‘This is a piece of infrastructure that has been built in regional Australia and that was needed, and it has helped not just the people of Gundagai but all users of the highway.’ However, I do make reference to the fact that this infrastructure was funded under the previous government’s AusLink program.

Regional Australians should be aware that the government has gone out of its way to try to remove a support system that was specifically set up for them. Item 64 changes the title of section 52 and, accordingly, section 52 itself. Section 55 of the act deals with when it is appropriate to approve a strategic regional project. In essence, section 55 contains criteria that the minister must consider when deciding whether to fund a project. In particular, the minister must consider the regional consequences of the projects. Item 67 removes the word ‘regional’ from paragraph 55(a) so that it reads ‘industries’ and not ‘regional industries’. Similarly, item 69 removes the word ‘regional’ from paragraph 55(e) so that it reads ‘communities’ and not ‘ regional communities’. Item 68 deletes paragraph 55(b), which requires the minister to consider ‘the extent to which the project is likely to improve a road, railway or intermodal transfer facility that is regionally significant’. What an amazing number of changes. Have we heard one word in opposition to this from any regional member? The member for Ballarat is in the chamber, but we will not hear one word from any speaker from the government. Not one regional Labor speaker will come in here and oppose these changes, because you are simply not allowed to do so. When you are in the Labor Party and you are a member of the Labor government, you are not allowed to speak out in the interests of the people you represent for fear that something may happen.

What about the member for Dawson, the member for Flynn, the member for Eden-Monaro, the member for Hunter, the member for Page and the member for Ballarat? The removal of the word ‘regional’ affects your people—the people you represent and purport to represent fairly. There has not been not one word of opposition to this bill and the removal of the word ‘regional’. We know what will happen when you remove the word ‘regional’ from of all of this. Funds will not be spent in any of those regional areas; it will go to a city-centric government that are only concerned with city people. That is proven by the removal of the word ‘regional’ and the ability for regional people to access these programs. We know what will happen. We all know exactly what this Labor government think about regional people. If they can impact upon regional people then they most certainly will. There are obviously fewer votes for a Labor government in the country than there are in the city. I am disturbed by the fact that none of the regional Labor members are speaking out in opposition to what will obviously be a drain from any funding opportunities for rural and regional Australian infrastructure, particularly under this program.

As well as manoeuvring funds from regional Australia to urban areas, the government’s naming game is also at the expense of Australian people. There are road signs all over Australia that currently read ‘AusLink’ and they will have to be replaced because there is a new name. I just do not understand the value of money in removing these signs just in order for this government to convince Australia that investing in infrastructure is their idea. It is like treating the Australian people like idiots. I do not think that the Australian people are going to wear this for very much longer. The commitment to infrastructure lies with the coalition in the last AusLink proposal. I think that the publicity stunt that is now being undertaken by the government is, as I said, pretty much taking the Australian people as fools. It is an insult to them, in my view.

We would have hoped that there would be a focus on money that would deliver resources to rural and regional communities, but the fact is that is not the way it has panned out. As we saw with the last round of Infrastructure Australia funding, none of the projects that I believed were extremely well costed and would see the blueprint of the future of Australian freight movement realised were funded. Funds went to infrastructure in city and urban areas—platform resurfacing, rebuilding of urban platforms et cetera—when, in fact, there is an absolutely dire need for continued infrastructure building in many regional communities. That has been going on for many years.

When in government we heard the opposition carping along the side: ‘You don’t take responsibility for yourself.’ Now I am in opposition and I hear the government carping the same story they carped when they were on this side. You cannot go back. We had to first pay off a debt when the coalition came into government in 1996. There had been such a run-down over 13 years in rural and regional Australia. Nothing had been spent on infrastructure building in rural and regional Australia over the 13 years of Labor Hawke-Keating rule. When the coalition came into government, there was an enormous debt of $96 billion to pay off—$9 billion per annum in interest—before they could start delivering, in 2004-05, the infrastructure programs that were required to try and rebuild regional Australia from the deficit and lack of interest of 13 years of Labor rule. And, yes, infrastructure could have been built earlier if we had put the nation into further debt. Infrastructure in regional Australia could have been rolled out, but it was determined to take advantage of the minerals and mining resource boom, pay off the extraordinary debt, save $9 billion a year and put in a full national transport integration plan, which we did. We are now seeing the delivery of that real-term infrastructure rolled out and being opened by Labor ministers and members. They are delivering it and opening it as theirs when they know it is nothing to do with them. Real infrastructure was built. It did not turn into just sod-turning and looking to see how much infrastructure could be built in the future. It is real-term infrastructure; it is happening; and it is being opened right now.

The fact is that a significant number of regional programs have been cut or abolished by this government. It failed to deliver specific regional development programs in the 2009 budget. That budget has confirmed that this Rudd Labor government has broken almost all of its regional development election promises. Labor promised to offer the Better Regions Program to support community, economic and environmental projects. However, the program was never opened to receive applications. What a disgrace. After promising to increase transparency and accountability, Labor has used the program to fund only those commitments made by Labor candidates in electorates it targeted at the 2007 election.

Election promises are always made by governments and by hopeful oppositions wanting to go into government. But do not then be fibbers. Do not cheat and lie about it. Just say exactly what it is. I have had members coming to open Regional Partnership programs—and I am sure others have had members come into what are now opposition electorates—saying, ‘This is tremendous for the community.’ Yet the Regional Partnerships program was dumped by this government. It continually gets labelled in here as having been the National Party slush fund, but it delivered regional infrastructure. We have exactly the same thing happening here, with the government going out with its election promises and delivering them only in Labor electorates. And Labor is saying accountability for this government!

Labor promised to retain and enhance the Regional Partnerships program and the Sustainable Regions Program. However, the government has abolished them, and has even cancelled grants for projects that had been approved for funding by the former government—except of course when they were in Labor electorates. Labor promised to ensure that all funding applications for projects would be developed in consultation with Regional Development Australia. However, Regional Development Australia does not have access to a regional development funding program that could support local initiatives. So I cannot quite work out how liaising on all these applications will actually bring about any benefit when there simply is not any access to a funding program.

It is incredible that in a budget predicting that over one million Australians would lose their jobs—and which saddles every man, woman and child with a $9,000 debt as a result of the last stimulus rollout payments—the government failed to establish a regional development program that would support economic and social opportunities and create jobs in local communities. It is these jobs that are so important to regional communities. On Thursday I sat in question time and listened to the Prime Minister wax lyrical about the $303 million worth of water that he and the Minister for Climate Change and Water, Penny Wong, had just purchased from Twynam. Ninety-seven per cent of that water was purchased out of New South Wales, much of it from the electorate of Riverina, with not a skerrick of thought for the jobs of the people of the Riverina and many other areas across New South Wales. Ninety-seven per cent of that water came out of New South Wales alone, but have we heard one comment from the other side to say, ‘What social impact study was done prior to the purchase of this water to see how these communities will socially adjust?’ What modelling was done on that water purchase to see how many jobs would be lost? What modelling was done to see whether there would be any capacity or opportunity for all those regional people who are losing their jobs as a result of this water purchase to find jobs? What real study was undertaken by the Prime Minister and his minister to find out how much of their $303 million worth of water would actually achieve that being waxed lyrical about in question time last Thursday?

I tell you that this is seriously flawed. And here we go again: no consideration for regional people; just rip the heart out of regional communities. Nobody from this Labor government is ever going to stand up for regions. It does not matter whether you get up and represent. They have this thing: lions in the electorate and lambs in the House. Let me tell you: the major lions in the electorate are the Labor country members, but they are not even lambs in the House because their voices are invisible. No talk about the impact on people who live in regional Australia, as a result of this government’s legislation, ever comes from the mouth of any Labor regional member. We will not stand here holding our breath waiting for a Labor regional member to raise issues of discontent, issues of jobs losses in Dawson and many other communities due to an ETS or issues regarding the removal of funding from transport links and regional transport programs—funding to ensure that freight can make it and that regions can stay strong. You will never hear one word from them in this House—(Time expired)

See this speech in context