Robert Oakeshott (Lyne, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I appreciate members from both sides of the chamber staying to support this matter of public importance, because it is important and it is urgent. This is a matter in time in public policy where we have a great opportunity for state and federal governments to work together on many projects. We have a great threat at the moment where party politics can get in the way of the opportunity and we have an inability as a consequence to achieve the outcomes for this country that we might otherwise achieve.

I start with the good news. Six months ago Australia voted. A tight result was the consequence. The father of the House is obviously passionate about this topic, but a tight result was the outcome federally of the last election. Some tough negotiations happened. It was wound up with a bit of a longish speech at the time and a power-sharing arrangement was what occurred federally as a consequence. Over 80 commitments were agreed to over this period. A lot of work has gone into these over the last six months in getting the structures right and now we are starting to see from last Tuesday night some of the funding commitments, particularly in regional Australia, that are occurring as a consequence. Some of the long-term structural changes for future parliaments regardless of their political persuasion that will remain embedded as a consequence of this are a regional development department that is now back in place, a subcommittee of cabinet that now reviews all aspects of decision making on behalf of the regions and, importantly for this motion and for relationships between the Commonwealth of Australia and the states, real funding going into the Regional Development Australia network.

Fifty RDA committees are now in place around Australia. They are all doing good work strategically on behalf of their communities and, importantly, this structure is the meeting place between the Commonwealth and the states. The regional development arm of New South Wales is essentially the same regional development arm as of the Commonwealth. That has been important as of the last six months. What was a frustration before that was that real funding was not attached to this meeting place. That is now there and it empowers local communities and regions to get on with the job of community building. That is the good news and hopefully the good example for this debate of the power of cooperation that can achieve real results in building more productive and more resilient communities and getting better results with taxpayers' money. State and federal governments, therefore, regardless of political persuasion, can work together. The consensus structure that is now here to stay will, over time, deliver significant outcomes, mostly around the fact that there has been agreement and cooperation between the Commonwealth and the states, and because party politics has been put in the back pocket.

Now for the warning bells. We have seen in today's news some expression of concern, surprise and shock by the new New South Wales Liberal Premier that the $1 billion of extra money allocated to the Pacific Highway from the Commonwealth in Tuesday night's budget may be under threat. This Commonwealth commitment of an extra $1 billion—$750 million of new money and $250 million-odd that has been moved from a project in Sydney, with the agreement I understand of New South Wales, across to the Pacific Highway project—has significantly boosted the Commonwealth commitment to the Pacific Highway project, from $3.1 billion in its lifetime to $4.1 billion. That is about a 30 per cent increase we have achieved—

Mr Ruddock interjecting—

I think you are agreeing with me. Thank you, Father of the House, for agreeing with my point. We have seen a 30 per cent increase in the commitment from the Commonwealth for the construction of the Pacific Highway project.

Mr Ruddock interjecting—

Mr Albanese interjecting—

See this speech in context