Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Industry, Tourism and Resources) Share this | Hansard source

Again I say to the honourable member that the government is not ruling anything in or out. The matter is under consideration by the minister. But, first and foremost, we need to allow the ACCC to do its job impartially. There is no point in having an ACCC if indeed the government just leans on it every five minutes to change the direction of legislation in Australia. That will have massive effects on the investment confidence of people in Australia. The member talks about investment in infrastructure. I do not have the figures on what royalties are paid to the government of Western Australia in relation to iron ore, but I am sure that some of those royalties could be invested in providing infrastructure.

Last night in the House the member for Batman talked in, I must say, a very well-informed way about the coal industry, but the key point that the member for Batman did not raise in that debate was the amount of money secured by royalties. In  2005-06, New South Wales achieved some $447 million in coal royalties and, in that same period of time, Queensland achieved $1.15 billion. How much do the federal government achieve in royalties out of iron ore? The answer: nothing. How much do the federal government achieve in coal royalties? The answer: nothing. When it comes to infrastructure investment, we do not deny that we make our money through having an improved bottom line as a trading figure and through income taxes collected on the way. Those businesses have no GST liability, but what they do collect is paid back to the state government. It is important that the states recognise—as the member for Batman said last night—that there is a need, in partnership with federal, state and of course local government, to find ways of achieving solutions. We need to see some of the royalties that are achieved invested back into infrastructure, which would go part of the way towards solving some of these problems. I do understand that the issue in relation to the single rail line owned by one proprietor—

See this speech in context