Bernie Ripoll (Oxley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

The member for Kalgoorlie is right on one thing. As the news filters down through the community, they will have a very clear picture: a picture of a government that is committed to delivering infrastructure right across Australia, regardless of electorate. They will also have a very clear picture of an opposition—a Liberal Party and a National Party—hell bent and determined on doing anything that it can to stop infrastructure spending in those very same electorates. This is a preposterous position from an opposition that, while they were in government for 12 years, did not spend the money to fix up the roads, railways and boom gates. They did not spend the funding that was available in boom times in their own electorates.

The programs and infrastructure spending that they are talking about blocking and denying their own constituents are not new programs in terms of the work that is needed. These projects have been around for a decade or more. They sat on their hands and did nothing. They did not deliver infrastructure. And now that they are in opposition they take every opportunity to continue to block funding and prevent these projects taking place in their own electorates. What sort of thinking does it take from an opposition, hell bent on their own future and outcomes, to disregard its constituency? It is not a credible position. After 12 years of not funding good and worthy projects—after 10 to 12 years of not doing the things that they should have done; after not taking that responsibility on—they find themselves in opposition in this place and, when a good Labor government has the opportunity to spend that money and to provide that infrastructure, the road and the rail projects, what do the opposition do? The opposition attempt to block them in the Senate and oppose the Nation Building Program (National Land Transport) Amendment Bill 2009, which we are discussing today.

When I listen to the debate either on the monitor or in here in the House directly, what are the main concerns that I hear? What is this opposition’s number one thing that they are more upset about than anything else? It is not the fact that they are going to get a very serious and dangerous rail crossing fixed; they do not come in here and talk about that. It is not the fact that finally someone is going to take responsibility for and fix a project that has been sitting on their books for a decade or more; it is not that. No, it is the name change. They are more upset about the legacy of former Prime Minister Howard. They spend so much time in this place in the limited time we have available to us talking about legacies and great contributions, but it us who have to deliver the infrastructure. It is us who in the tough times, in a global financial crisis, are left holding the can, who are having to do the work that they should have done. But they did not have the fortitude. They come in here and talk about getting re-elected and all the rest of it, but, before you even think about elections, think about doing something in your own electorate. Think about delivering the infrastructure projects; think about doing something for your own community.

The opposition may laugh but, if they will not do things in their own community, we will. We will take on that responsibility. We will do it in the good times and we will do it in the tough times. We will do it whether we have to borrow to do it or whether there is spare cash floating around. I am not afraid to talk about debt or about borrowing, because people do understand the difference between a good government and a bad government. They know a good government is one that is prepared to invest in them, that is prepared to borrow money to make sure that you drive the economy, that you prevent jobs disappearing, that you save industry, that you save lives, that you build the legacy projects and the infrastructure projects needed in this country so that we as an economy, as a people, as a community can actually get through this. We will get through this, soon enough, and when we do it will have been all those great legacy projects that this government has provided that will have made the difference.

Opposition members talk about all these things, but just remember that they are talking about their opposition to school funding in their own electorates. They are actually going to vote against their own schools. Think about that for a moment—they are going to vote against funding for their own schools, they are going to vote against funding for road and rail projects in their electorates. They are going to vote against the need to upgrade serious high-risk, high-fatality areas such as railway crossings and boom gates. They are going to vote against Roads to Recovery programs. They are going to vote against black spot funding. Why? Why would they vote against all that? I do not know—why would anyone vote against funding in their own electorates? Maybe we ought to pay very close attention to the speeches that we are going to hear from opposition members as to why they actually oppose this. So far all I have heard is because it is a name change. So, for the sake of a name on a piece of paper in legislation they are prepared to forgo funding for their schools. What bighearted Liberal and National parties we have in this country!

This is the first opportunity they have had in more than a decade to actually do something for their own electorate because they did not have the gall to do it while the government. They had the opportunity; they just did not take it. They come in here and talk about projects that are not funded—we could do this in our electorates and we could do that in our electorates. Why did they not do it when they were in government? Why did the members of the now opposition, the Liberal and National parties, not actually take it upon themselves to argue for it in their own caucus room, within cabinet, with the then Prime Minister to actually deliver on road and rail funding; on funding for ports and all the other great programs. No, that is not of concern to them. What is of concern to them is the legacy in their own minds of the former Prime Minister. It is all about name changes, about who gets recognised for delivering these programs.

As I said earlier, before you think about getting recognised for what you have done, do it in the first place. Do not wait for another government to come along, as we have done, to actually do the job that the Liberal and National parties would not do. They come into this House and say one thing but in their electorates they do another. They do one thing here, but say something different somewhere else. It is exceptionally dishonest to turn up to a school in your electorate that is getting funding and say to them that you are absolutely in favour of the funding they are getting, but then come into this House and vote against it. The Liberal and National parties should be ashamed. Their behaviour is disgraceful and all of the House should support these measures and other measures delivering vital infrastructure for the Australian economy.

See this speech in context