Rowan Ramsey (Grey, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I congratulate the member for Solomon on her maiden speech. I also congratulate the Labor Party and the Prime Minister on being returned to government, even though it must be said that that has been done by cobbling together a rainbow alliance which will be tested daily by the challenges of government and the diametrically opposed views of various parties.

In the electorate of Grey I would like to thank my constituents for their vote of confidence. A positive 6.7 per cent swing at a time when we saw an overall move to the Labor Party in South Australia was a very good result. While I take some of the credit for that result, I also recognise that the electorate was expressing a very strong desire to change the government. They were sick of the mismanagement, the waste, the backflips and the thought bubble politics which saw policy lurches in every direction. There was also a great distrust in the electorate of the obviously external mechanisms which saw the removal of a first-term Prime Minister in Kevin Rudd. The sight of Paul Howes, a union representative, on national television gloating over the fact that he had removed the Prime Minister was not something Australians expect or want to see. But the electoral system has worked and has delivered us a government with a workable majority, and the government should get on with the job of governing and delivering on their electoral commitments. We in the coalition will get on with the job of holding them to account, of holding them responsible for the commitments that they have made to the Australian people.

Already we have seen a major about-face on the Prime Minister’s solemn commitment to no new carbon tax and we have seen the reversal of a commitment to have a 150-person assembly to examine climate change—quite rightly, it must be said, because what a stupid idea that was in the first place. But it was a commitment from the Prime Minister made to win an election, and what are people to think if policies are to last only the length of the election campaign? We have seen the abandonment of a commitment to implement the recommendations of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority in full. The Prime Minister committed to implement the recommendations and now instead, at the first sign of pressure, has followed the well-worn path of the Rudd government and announced a committee to review the situation—another committee.

I am, of course, disappointed that the coalition was not able to form government and that the commitments I made to my electorate will not be able to be delivered. These include, in particular, the re-establishment of the Australian technical college in the Upper Spencer Gulf; the issuing of an operating licence for an MRI machine for the region; the Green Army environmental projects in Whyalla, Port Pirie and Peterborough; major stormwater projects in Port Lincoln, Orroroo and Port Vincent; and closed circuit TV systems for Coober Pedy, Ceduna and Whyalla. All of these projects would have been delivered by a coalition government. They will not be delivered by this Labor government.

The glaringly obvious fact of the election is that the government places little priority on regional Australia. If it is to make a greater commitment, it will only be as a cost of doing business with the Independents, and it remains to be seen whether there will be a true value in those deals. I seriously doubt any long-term change in the attitudes of the government.

There is a great danger that this, the 43rd Parliament of Australia, will see a lurch to the left as the government tries to meet its commitments to the Greens. The larger political agenda of the Greens will cause concern to much of mainstream Australia, many of whom it must be said may have even voted for the Greens in the past. Next July will present a completely new environment to the Greens as they take a far more powerful position in the Australian parliament, because with power comes responsibility. No longer will they be able to espouse preposterous ideas from the safety of powerlessness, with no chance of ever being in a position to deliver. Uncosted utopian snapshots will have to stack up to new policy examination from the press, the public and the parliament.

The Greens are now faced with the option of remaining a protest movement or becoming a serious political party. It is of interest to note that their achievement of nine senators at this election is matched by the high watermark of the Australian Democrats in 1998—a time when the Democrats attempted to become a mature and responsible political party, an approach which was ultimately rejected by the electorate. What a position for the Greens. Do they accept the challenge to become responsible and accept the economic ramifications of many of their far left-wing policies and risk the wrath of their long-term supporters, or do they remain true to their radical manifest and run the risk of offending mainstream Australia, who have chosen to give them a chance? Many have said that this parliament will be very interesting. I think that is an understatement.

I listened to the Governor-General’s address on the occasion of the opening of the 43rd Parliament with great interest, even though I must say that, as I gazed across the chamber, not every member of the government seemed similarly interested. Anyway, I listened in vain for an admission that the previous government had lost its way, as the Prime Minister believes the former leader had, and that the Gillard government would mend its ways and operate an improved system for Australia. I had hoped the government would face up to the waste on school halls, green loans and home insulation. Instead, it seems the government has learnt nothing from the experience and intends to blow another $2 billion of taxpayers’ money on the widely ridiculed ‘cash for clunkers’ scheme. This threatens to become another ‘school halls’, where every bucket of bolts in the country automatically becomes a $2,000 cheque, every person who needs a cheap car will pay at least $2,000, and in the end all it will do is bring forward inevitable purchases. It threatens to become a $2 billion waste.

The tragedy is the missed opportunities across the nation—the infrastructure that could have been built with the money the government has wasted: $22 billion in $900 cheques, almost $17 billion in school halls, green loans and $3 billion on a home insulation scheme which has set the industry back 20 years. Remember the previous Prime Minister standing out the front of Parliament House and telling the insulation industry that he got it. Try telling the industry now that the government understands; there are warehouses full of materials and a totally destroyed market, and a population with little or no confidence in the industry.

So what could we have done with the money? Where can the taxpayer get a bang for their buck? I have said in this place before that South Australia will increasingly rely on the electorate of Grey to be the economic driver of the state. But there are a wide range of projects which need the attention of either state or federal government in tandem with private industry.

New mining taxes notwithstanding, South Australia desperately needs a new deep sea port somewhere in Spencer Gulf. No fewer than four new iron miners are trying to establish export paths. Some are planning to export out of Port Adelaide in containers, another is planning to establish a barge system and yet another is planning to export through the town of Port Lincoln, amid strong local opposition, while trying to establish a new port. But, all the while, every dollar invested in suboptimal alternatives lessens the chance of an industry-wide approach to the establishment of a new port. Unfortunately, the state government has just allowed things to meander. No doubt, prime responsibility rests with the miners, but sometimes projects need careful assistance from governments.

In South Australia we continue to pay the price for having a tired and uninterested state government which is going through the motions of removing its leadership in an effort to shore up support. The case was made for federal assistance with port development at Oakajee, in Western Australia. A new port in South Australia is of similar importance to the region. Further west, the port of Thevenard desperately needs upgrading—so much so that, in the longer term, without an upgrade, farming west of Streaky Bay is likely to become unviable. There are real opportunities here. Already, the port supplies the bulk of Australia’s gypsum for the manufacture of plasterboard—around two million tonnes per year. It also shifts hundreds of thousands of tonnes of grain and salt, with the prospect of developing new bulk commodities with major mineral sands mining developments in the west of the state. At the current time, shipments are being achieved on small vessels, which are rapidly drying up around the world and come at a high cost. For the grain industry, which is export focused, the loss of shipping would mean the western end of the grain growing region would be sending its grain more than 500 kilometres by road. Simply put, these are costs the industry cannot absorb.

Without some government attention I fear the future is not bright. Surely it is better to make sure good, viable industries survive rather than trying to resettle the collateral damage in our cities. Our roads are creaking under the strain. From our highways to our outback network, this year the roads are awash; but they are also struggling from years of state government neglect. I have just returned from a trip up the Birdsville Track. The deserts are blooming. Lake Eyre once again has a substantial amount of water, and parts of the tourism industry are having a strong year. But others, unfortunately, are languishing, simply because the road is cut. This is not just because the Cooper is in flood; it is because the South Australian outback road network has been run into the ground. Sure, the punt at the creek is an inadequate link but, with the road being cut by pooled water every time it rains, the traffic is not even reaching there.

Upon coming to power in 2002, the state government halved its commitment to the outback road system by abolishing two of the four road gangs. The years since then have provided rivers of gold from the GST and skyrocketing land tax revenues, but state government expenditure has risen even faster than receipts and we have little to show for it—so much so that the recent budget was a story of slash and burn as the government belatedly attempted to bring things back into order. It seems this was far too late, as state debt now stands at over $7 billion, not far short of the $9 billion disaster that was the calamity of the State Bank—and this debt has been accumulated at a time of comparative prosperity.

So it is not just about the Birdsville Track; the thousands of kilometres of outback roads from Wirrulla to Marla to Broken Hill are in poor repair and require significant investment. In the south, bitumen arterials like the Maitland to Minlaton road, the Bute to Kulpara road, the Barrier Highway, the Clare to Spalding road and the Wudinna to Port Lincoln road are all in need of serious attention.

The growth prospects of the entire electorate are inextricably linked to water, and new supply solutions must be provided. The recent report by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority should ensure there are no new users connected to the river. BHP’s proposed expansion at Roxby Downs promises to be the biggest ever single economic contributor to the state, and I will do all I can to see it delivered. However, that is not to say we should give BHP carte blanche to do anything it wishes—and I am opposed to the siting of a desalination plant in the upper Spencer Gulf. The environmental impact statement proposes a 100 gigalitre per year plant just north of Whyalla. Already, there is discussion that BHP may expand the operation even more than first envisaged. This would require even more water.

We cannot afford to take that risk with the sensitive marine environment at the top of the gulf, which is the breeding ground for much of the state’s fisheries. A 100 gigalitre plant would see around 200 gigalitres per annum of saline water returned to the gulf, and a bigger plant would obviously return more. The Spencer Gulf prawn fishery breeding grounds are in the area approximate to the proposed outfalls. This industry returns more than $40 million each year to the state. Similarly, the breeding grounds for the snapper and whiting, two of the state’s most sought after and valuable fisheries, are in the area. We cannot afford to take this chance, only to find in 20 or 30 years time that the fisheries are ruined. We must insist on the safe solution. While all costs are important to the viability of the proposed expansion, it is difficult to believe that the extra 80 kilometres of pipeline needed to move the desalination plant to an ocean outfall on the west coast of Eyre Peninsula would be an insurmountable problem.

On the broader front, I am concerned that the government does not recognise the inherent dangers of our economic position. Australia’s economy is fundamentally underwritten by exports. Dollar parity with the US is a creeping disaster for our exporters. Aquaculture, agriculture and mineral exports all have their real value eroded by this position. It is worth reflecting on what the current surge in the Australian dollar actually means to exporters. If we take a look at a wheat farm for instance, the world wheat price is currently at a very high level. A US price in excess of 700c a bushel is double what we would have considered to be a good price as recently as five years ago. However, five years ago, farmers were receiving prices in the low A$200 a tonne range. Now, following a more than doubling of world wheat prices, farmers will probably receive around $275 a tonne—a lift of about $50 a tonne, or 20 per cent. World wheat prices have doubled but we will only receive an extra 20 per cent. All the rest has been lost with our appreciating dollar. With due consideration to Western Australia, which is struggling with a drought, eastern Australia is contemplating a very good season. But farming is made of highs and lows, and it is our ability to accumulate savings in the good times that allows us to stay in business in the tough times.

The current state of the dollar is almost certainly costing good farmers $60 to $100 a tonne. It is also almost certainly ensuring that, when the drought returns, as inevitably it does in Australia, farmers will not be in the position they should be to withstand that drought. I have focused just on the wheat industry, but the lesson is the same across the board. Wool, meat, pulses and coarse grains are all losing millions of dollars. And not just agriculture but seafood, manufacturing and mineral exports are all missing out on high profits which are their insurance policies for the future.

There are a number of reasons for the high dollar, as there always are, and certainly the high price of mineral commodities is one of them. However, despite the government’s claim, there is no doubt that high government borrowings are restricting the availability of money for business and homeowners. You simply cannot suck $80-plus billion out of the economy in government borrowings and claim it does not affect interest rates and the availability of money. The cost of government borrowings is far more than just the interest paid. The distortions of the economy caused by the high-borrowing policy flow through to all business and consumers.

The government simply must rein in its borrowings. There is no doubt that relatively high interest rates attract investment in Australian dollars. In fact interest rates in Australia are so high comparatively that investors are borrowing money in markets like Japan and the US where they have effective rates of zero and reinvesting in Australia, only adding to the pressure on the dollar and interest rates.

I have received many recent approaches from local businesses telling me that banks simply are not lending. A motel operator in one of my regional centres was recently telling me that his bank refused a $100,000 loan to refurbish some of his rooms. He told me he had a working overdraft of $85,000, which represented his total liability. I estimate his business to be worth somewhere between $3 million and $4 million. This is not a normal business circumstance; it is a handbrake on investment. For someone to have a $3 million or $4 million investment and not be able to borrow $100,000 is an absolute threat to business generally. Others have approached me with stories of an inability to buy existing and established businesses because finance which previously would have been forthcoming is simply not available.

A relatively high Australian dollar against the US gives all of our competitors a relative advantage, and all this at a time when the government intends to increase that advantage by imposing massive new taxes on our economy through the mining resource rental tax and a carbon tax. Most industry analysts expect the price of electricity in Australia to rise in the order of 40 per cent over the next five years.

Life is about opportunity, and there is no doubt in my mind that the government has a great opportunity here to do enormous damage to our economy. Higher spending, higher taxes and higher interest rates will all erode our ability to pay our way in the world. There still time for the government to take control of its budget, address the wastage and mismanagement and reduce the pressure on Australian business and families.

In closing, I would like to thank the voters in Grey for once again giving me the opportunity to represent them here in parliament. I would like to thank those hundreds of supporters who made it possible for me to present a cohesive campaign to the electorate. We live in one of the most dramatic and exciting parts of Australia. We have unique opportunities in tourism, mining, aquaculture and downstream processing, and I believe in our future, but we also need government to work with us and not amplify the difficulties we face.

See this speech in context