Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker Adams. And I thank my friend the honourable member for Griffith for his assistance to you as to the name of my electorate. It is interesting, Mr Deputy Speaker:  so many people from your electorate are moving to mine, I would have thought that you would have known where they were escaping to.

I am pleased to be able to join the debate on the Australian Trade Commission Legislation Amendment Bill 2006. I listened carefully to the contribution made by the honourable member for Griffith. As always, it was thought provoking. Sadly, in this case it was not entirely on the subject of the legislation we are currently debating. His second reading amendment, as so often happens in the House of Representatives, seems to deal with issues other than the issues being dealt with by the Australian Trade Commission Legislation Amendment Bill 2006. Having said that, politics is politics. But I think it is important for all of us to appreciate that the desire of all governments is, or should be, the efficient provision of good services to those people they govern. It is widely recognised not only throughout Australia but indeed throughout the world that this government over the last 10 years has been responsible for sound economic management. We have brought about an enormous number of positive changes. We have repaid every last cent of government debt. We have brought the budget into surplus at a time when we have been able to reduce taxes and improve the quality of life of all Australians.

It is important also for governments to always remember that, no matter what good a job is being done, the job is never finished. This government would be the last government to suggest that our good governance over the last 10 years means that there is no need any longer for more sound economic management in the future. Governments must always be wary that unwise spending decisions could ultimately have an adverse impact on the quality of life of residents.

Mr John Uhrig AC is a person who is highly regarded. In earlier times he would have actually been a Knight of the Realm, because the award of Commander of the Order of Australia was supposed to replace knighthoods. So in 2002 we chose a person who is eminently well regarded in the community to conduct a review of the corporate governance of Commonwealth statutory authorities and office holders to determine whether any of the management operations could be improved or modified to ensure more efficient operations, thereby reducing costs and improving service delivery to the people. The review was known as the ‘Review of Corporate Governance of Commonwealth Statutory Authorities and Office Holders’—quite a mouthful, I am sure you will agree, Mr Deputy Speaker. But the name of the review summed up rather nicely what the review was all about. Mr Uhrig was also asked by the Australian government to utilise the review process to formulate suggestions about how things could be done better. He was asked to provide options to the government to get the most efficient results from the statutory bodies. The honourable member for Griffith, in his contribution, has outlined how the character of the Australian Trade Commission will alter in accordance with the recommendations of Mr Uhrig.

Mr Uhrig also came back with a standard framework of good governance guidelines that the government could use for statutory bodies and then apply more widely to public sector organisations. As one would expect with a review of this nature, input was derived from a wide range of areas, including ministers of the Crown, office holders in statutory bodies, various departments, consumer groups and business organisations. This was not a review that the government arranged overnight. It was a genuine review whereby we consulted widely with the Australian community, because the purpose of this review was to ensure that we did have better governance when the recommendations of Mr Uhrig were handed down.

Among Mr Uhrig’s recommendations, it was decided that those statutory bodies that have a service provision role should be subject to the guidelines in the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997. The Australian Trade Commission Legislation Amendment Bill 2006 helps to introduce some of the amendments suggested by the review in how they relate to the Australian Trade Commission. The commission, known as Austrade, is a statutory body whose role is to assist Australian business to acquire more successfully overseas sales, thereby boosting our international earnings and ensuring a better quality of life for all Australians.

Austrade—and I think this is accepted generally—have the expertise and the know-how to assist in the international business arena and their experience can help greatly reduce the hurdles, risks, costs and difficulties that would otherwise be faced by those operators eager to export to the world. I think most honourable members would have approaches from constituents from time to time who, having been successful locally in their business, are keen to spread their wings and export to the world. Often it is so difficult for a small business which has had a good idea and has successfully developed that idea to take that next step. That is one of the reasons why, under successive governments, Austrade has done a very good job.

The Austrade mission is to contribute to community wealth by helping more Australians succeed in export and international business. It is a noble and niche service. This bill will enable the Australian Trade Commission to be transformed from a statutory authority, governed under the Commonwealth Authorities and Companies Act 1997, to a statutory agency administered through the Public Service Act 1999 and a prescribed agency under the Financial Management and Accountability Act 1997.

Honourable members might be interested to know that there are around 170 Australian government statutory authorities and that they have all been subject to reviews under the provisions as suggested by Mr Uhrig’s review. The Austrade changes are not the first to be implemented as a result of the review. Last October, changes were made to the operating frameworks of Medicare Australia, whereby the Medicare board has been dissolved and an executive management system has been introduced. Also, the recommendations by the review will lead to operational changes to the Australian Research Council, which will transform to a set-up of executive management similar to Austrade. The National Health and Medical Research Council will become an independent statutory body, but with the appointment of an executive management.

These changes are all designed to improve the efficiency of these bodies. As one would expect, some statutory bodies will not be changed as a result of the review. Honourable members may or may not be aware that these would include the Australian National Audit Office, the Australian Public Service Commission, the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security, the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s office, Geoscience Australia, as well as the more visible bodies such as the Reserve Bank of Australia, AusAID and Australia Post.

A number of other statutory bodies have had their operations assessed. The Australian Trade Commission Legislation Amendment Bill 2006, which is currently before the House, is part of this ongoing process of reform by the coalition, which, after 10 years of effective government, is not reform-weary. We are continuing to do the job entrusted to us by the Australian people in successive elections from 1996 to 1998 to 2001 and 2004.

The Australian Trade Commission Legislation Amendment Bill 2006 will help deliver greater efficiencies and greater accountability to Commonwealth statutory bodies. I am very pleased to commend the bill to the House and, in doing so, I place on the public record my opposition to the second reading amendment moved by the honourable member for Griffith.

See this speech in context