Daryl Melham (Banks, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise today to support this significant initiative of the Australian government. It is important to Australia in a number of ways. Firstly, the introduction of this bill is evidence that the Rudd Labor government keeps its promises. Secondly, it demonstrates the government’s commitment to ensuring that there is an open and transparent process in place for infrastructure development. Finally, it is the continuation of the great Labor tradition of investing in nation building.

At its first cabinet meeting in Karratha in January of this year, the government discussed the implementation of its election promise to introduce a bill creating Infrastructure Australia. It was decided that the legislation would be introduced into the parliament at the first session. The Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government then introduced the bill on 21 February 2008.

This initiative is one part of the government’s five-point plan to fight inflation. This broad plan to deal with Australia’s inflation problem includes aiming for a target surplus of 1.5 per cent of GDP for the upcoming financial year, looking at options to boost national savings and encourage a national savings culture in Australia, acting decisively and effectively on the national skills crisis, dealing effectively with the challenge of public infrastructure bottlenecks and acting to boost employment participation. It is only by acting decisively that we can deal with our inflation challenge. It will not be easy, but without a clear strategy pointing the way to the future, nothing will be done.

The introduction of Infrastructure Australia is a significant step towards solving some of our most critical infrastructure blockages. This was a promise of Labor during the election campaign and, as with our other promises, action is occurring to ensure its implementation. The minister in his second reading speech noted the Committee of Economic Development of Australia report Growth 54: infrastructure—getting on with the job. That report highlighted their finding:

The backlog of needed infrastructure projects in Australia is estimated at $25 billion worth of projects. With this much-needed investment in place, Australia’s GDP would be 0.8 per cent higher each year. That translates to $6 billion a year—or an average of $300 per Australian.

The report further noted that there are adequate funds available to fix the backlog of projects, but what was lacking was the political will to do so across Commonwealth and state governments. Australia has benefited economically from a sustained period of economic growth. What has been lacking is the infrastructure to support that growth and the opportunities emerging from developing countries.

The CEDA report noted that there are large capital resources accumulating in the private sector. The minister stated in a media conference on 21 January 2008 that there is $1.1 trillion existing in superannuation funds, which people in the superannuation industry are saying is available for investment, preferably in Australia rather than overseas. The CEDA report also commented that there is evidence of a strong linkage between infrastructure investment and economic growth. The report further states:

... investment and infrastructure generates higher returns and investment in other sectors of the economy.

Infrastructure requirements fall into broad categories across the spectrum and include roads, railways, seaports, telecommunications, electricity, water and airports, to name some of the critical needs. A report from the Productivity Commission was released in February 2005. That report was the Review of national competition policy reforms. In chapter 8, the Productivity Commission outlined what it identified as opportunities to improve the efficiency of economic infrastructure through further competition based reforms. The report stated:

... in identifying a reform agenda, the Commission has targeted areas that meet three tests: being inherently national in character; offering the prospect of significant gains; and likely to benefit from a nationally agreed reform framework under the stewardship of COAG or another national leadership body.

The report then continues in chapter 8 to identify key areas where it believes reform could be targeted. These include: the energy sector; the water sector; two aspects of the transport sector, the national freight system and a review of national passenger transport; and reform in the communications sector. In broader terms, the role of Infrastructure Australia will be to develop a strategic blueprint for Australia’s infrastructure needs. This will include an ongoing cooperative process across the Commonwealth, the states and industry to identify and prioritise infrastructure projects.

The first task for the new body will be to conduct an audit of the nation’s infrastructure needs based on that audit. An infrastructure priority list will be established within 12 months for consideration by COAG. The role of Infrastructure Australia will be to provide advice to government through COAG as well as investors and owners of infrastructure. This will include advice on infrastructure priorities, appropriate policy and regulatory reforms, options to address impediments, the needs of users and possible financing mechanisms. The geography and population of Australia require infrastructure solutions that are created from a national perspective. It is vital that infrastructure plans are aligned across the various jurisdictions.

The greatest example of this was of course the Snowy Mountains scheme. The concept for the scheme was launched in 1949 through the cooperation of the Commonwealth, and the New South Wales and Victorian governments. Of course, the scheme was the brainchild of Prime Minister Ben Chifley and it was, apart from the historical nature of the concept, a most courageous decision. The project took 25 years to complete. Apart from the massive contribution to water flows and electricity in this country, the nature of the scheme itself changed the character of Australia.

As I indicated earlier, the Labor Party has a proud history of leadership in the establishment of infrastructure projects in this country. Gough Whitlam has stated publicly on more than one occasion that one of his proudest achievements was the establishment of infrastructure projects across Australia, including sewerage. His initiatives made life so much more liveable for Australians in the newly developing suburbs around Sydney, Brisbane and Melbourne. Gough realised, as many did not, that, unless the federal government took the lead in these matters, little would happen on the scale which was required nationally. Famously, Neville Wran said of Gough, who accepted the sentiment if not the comparison:

It was said of Caesar Augustus that he found Rome a city of brick and left it a city of marble ... He found Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and Perth unsewered, and left them fully flushed.

It was the Whitlam government that established the first ministry of urban and regional development dedicated to providing the necessary direction to ensure infrastructure reform at the urban level. The minister Tom Uren established the Australian Heritage Commission and the subsequent compilation of the Register of the National Estate. He promoted the restoration and re-use of derelict inner city areas such as the Glebe estate and Woolloomooloo in Sydney, and the reclamation of Duck Creek and the creation of the Chipping Norton Lakes scheme. Tom Uren established the creation of the land commissions to ensure availability of reasonably priced housing blocks and the development of new planned communities. Later Labor governments under Prime Ministers Hawke and Keating opened up the economy, which made us more competitive as a nation.

Under Prime Minister Keating the Better Cities Program was introduced by Brian Howe. This was a broad reform strategy that included innovative housing and it focused on urban consolidation. The genesis of the program was at a premier’s conference in 1991 where the Commonwealth, state and territory governments agreed to work together on urban consolidation and renewal through practical measures and coordination across governments. Better Cities forged strong, cooperative relationships with the states. Better Cities and even the former Department of Urban and Regional Development were well suited to their time, but that does not mean that they are suitable solutions for tackling today’s urban problems or the ones looming on the horizon.

I cite this initiative as an example of how governments can and have taken the lead in resolving issues of national importance. As a nation, we are very highly urbanised. We need healthy, vibrant communities with appropriate levels of infrastructure to support those communities. Our capital and regional cities are suffering a complex set of stresses. Urban sprawl as people move further and further from city centres is causing increased travelling times, more pollution and greater reliance on the car. At the same time congestion has become more common in the older and inner suburbs as residential densities increase. Our capital cities have become sprawling residential corridors. Population growth from immigration has exacerbated this trend, particularly for Sydney. It is also evidenced in our coastal cities, and more and more Australians are seeking to escape the stresses of capital city living.

The traditional design and development of cities around a CBD is no longer able to support the diverse needs of today’s community. Household size, work, education and recreation patterns have changed. In addition, much of the infrastructure in our cities was built for different levels of development and not in anticipation of the demands of today. Our increasing consumption of energy, water and telecommunications is placing new demands on our cities, but planning systems are not responding to these trends or showing any understanding of the impacts on people’s lives and communities. Over 87 per cent of Australians live in urban areas. This means that the shape of our urban environment is critical to the daily lives and wellbeing of most Australians. Urban development directly impacts on where we live, where we work and play, where our children go to school, university and TAFE, the transport systems we use, how we access medical, dental and other services and the quality of our air, water and landscape.

Cities that were designed to meet 19th century requirements do not meet the needs of the 21st century. We need roads and public transport to allow the community to easily access work, services and education while minimising our carbon footprint. Access to these facilities is an issue of equity. We must ensure that urban infrastructure will allow the community access to work or services that do not require travel two hours each way, each day. I note, for example, the new M7 in Sydney’s west. The M7 has cut out about 55 sets of traffic lights and does provide easier access for many people in Western Sydney. It also assists truck drivers who want to avoid driving into Sydney itself. They are now able to drive around Sydney and keep to their schedule.

We need new, fresh ideas for infrastructure development in this country. In the same way that previous Labor governments introduced new ideas for infrastructure reform, this government is prepared to take the lead in the 21st century. I hear the negative comments made by the other side in response to the Prime Minister’s 2020 initiative. One of the differences of this government from the previous government is that we do not believe that we have a monopoly on ideas for the future. The Australia 2020 Summit is about the community coming up with ideas to take this country into the future. We require down-to-earth, practical proposals to implement a new vision for a sustainable future. The bill before the House does just that. It proposes realistic solutions to problems facing Australia. The vital role to be performed by Infrastructure Australia will be to provide a strategic blueprint, and this blueprint will allow us, as a nation, to prepare for future challenges like urban congestion, climate change and population demands. It will also drive reform on how to maximise the infrastructure we already have. I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context