Fran Bailey (McEwen, Liberal Party, Minister for Small Business and Tourism) Share this | Hansard source

I would firstly like to thank the members who have participated in this debateon the Tourism Australia Amendment Bill 2007our tourism industry is a very important industry—but I understand that the opposition spokesperson wants to move an amendment. I have to say that this is very disappointing, given the undertaking that I had from the opposition that this was non-controversial legislation and could have been expedited in this chamber.

I will just deal very quickly with the three points. The opposition spokesperson has mentioned the industry’s ‘current poor health’. There could be nothing further from the truth. This is now a $75 billion industry. In the last 12 months, we have had the highest number of international visitors coming to Australia. Most importantly, the yield in the last 12 months was $1.8 billion more than in any other year—that is right, Mr Deputy Speaker Adams: $1.8 billion more—bringing the total of export earnings for this industry to $19½ billion.

In areas like yours in Tasmania, Mr Deputy Speaker Adams, this is very important. In fact, your own state is one state that has been improving its numbers. One of the reasons it has been improving its numbers is that there is greater collaboration between Tourism Australia and all of the state and regional tourist authorities. The Commonwealth has now put $21½ billion dollars into research. This is not research that we keep locked up in a vault within Tourism Australia. This research is shared with the states on an ongoing basis. There probably has never before been greater cooperation between state and regional tourist authorities and Tourism Australia.

One state sticks out and that is the state of New South Wales. The reason it is not performing as well as and is not showing the level of growth as your own state of Tasmania, Mr Deputy Speaker, is simply that the New South Wales government is spending less today in marketing tourism than it was spending five years ago. It is not rocket science to know that you simply have to put funding in if you are going to get results. I take my hat off to the Tasmanian government. I believe in giving credit where it is due and I think the states around Australia have recognised the value of tourism. The domestic market has been flat for some time but, because of the level of cooperation and work that the Commonwealth is showing through its leadership, the latest figures show that our domestic market has started to turn around. So when I am informed by the opposition spokesperson, the member for Batman, that there needs to be greater collaboration between federal and state governments, I do not know how on earth he could say that.

In a press release put out by all of the state tourism ministers, they agreed to closer ties and they took advantage of the new intergovernmental arrangements which formally set out principles for cooperation and agreement. At a meeting of tourism ministers chaired by the South Australian Labor Minister for Tourism, Jane Lomax-Smith, issues discussed were based on sharing of market intelligence, tourism quality, international promotion, regional tourism, destination marketing plans, tourism and conservation issues and matters relating to the understanding of the real economic value of tourism. That is a pretty fair list on which all of the state tourism ministers agree that there is a very good cooperative working relationship between them and the federal government. When the member for Batman makes the point that there needs to be greater collaboration between federal and state governments, I think he should come back here and tell us what he is referring to. He should come back here now and tell us exactly what he is referring to. I tell you what, Mr Deputy Speaker: it will be the first time that the member for Batman has actually spoken about tourism in this place.

He has also raised a point about broadening ministerial powers regarding the termination of board members. Do you know what he has done? He has taken one line out of a whole document which enshrines the flexibility of Tourism Australia and gives the board additional authority. Why would a government not want the ability, if a board member was performing in a most unsatisfactory manner, to get rid of a non-performing board member in the interests of a $75 billion industry? More than half a million Australians depend on this industry for their jobs and the government is really looking after the men and women and their family members who work in this great industry.

I have to say that I am very disappointed in this pathetic political point-scoring by the member for Batman. I actually thought better of him. I can see that my trust was misplaced, and I think that it is shame on his head for trying to politically point-score about an issue backed by the whole of the tourism industry, Tourism Australia, the state tourist authorities and the regional tourist authorities. I say again: there is still some time left; why doesn’t the member for Batman come back into this chamber? If he wants to put these points forward as an amendment, he should be prepared to come into this chamber to debate them with me, because I can tell you, Mr Deputy Speaker, that the points he has raised are nonsense. Let me just reaffirm those points again. Despite what the member for Batman says, the industry is in very good shape. Every industry can do better, and this government has provided unprecedented levels of funding to ensure that this industry gets every opportunity to do better. There has never been a greater level of cooperation between the federal government and the state governments for the simple fact that we all realise this is an industry that spans territorial boundaries. It is an industry that we all understand employs more than half a million Australians. Most significantly, it employs more than 200,000 people in regional areas of Australia, which of course is why the Australian government, the Howard government, is so keen and so prepared, as it always has been, not just to stand and talk mere rhetoric about this great industry but also to get in and back it with unprecedented levels of funding.

The third point is about trying to point-score about one sentence in a 100-plus-page document that everybody in the industry supports. Many have acknowledged that the Australian government has taken a real leadership role on behalf of the industry in this matter; this of course follows the Uhrig review. The bottom line is that any government, no matter what level of government it is, is responsible for the taxpayer funds that are being used. As a marketing organisation, Tourism Australia gets more than 80 per cent of its funding directly from the Australian government. The board of Tourism Australia, charged with the responsibility of overseeing the expenditure of that money, must be accountable. It must also be accountable for the actions it takes. Once again, I will not—and this government will not—shy away from saying that if in the unlikely situation a board member is performing in an unsatisfactory manner then the government providing the funding to that organisation, the level of government that appoints the members of that board, has the right to say, in the interests of the more than half a million Australians dependent on this industry for their jobs, that the board has to do its job. As I said, I have given the member for Batman as much time as I can to get his skates on and get up here to try to justify this absolutely pathetic political point-scoring—the three points I have just dismissed.

I have nothing further to add other than to say once again that there are members on both sides of this parliament who have a genuine interest in and commitment to ensuring that our great tourism industry continues to be one of the fastest growth sectors in our economy and, importantly, provides jobs and training and the delivery of real benefits not just to our national economy but to state, regional and local economies. I commend this legislation to the House.

See this speech in context