Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

The member for Parkes may understand why the member for Cowper has brought this motion before the House; but, please forgive me, I do not. But I do understand the area that the member for Cowper represents because I have lived there longer than he has. So I really do understand the issues surrounding this motion. I suspect, knowing the good people of Cowper the way I do, that if they had a member who really concentrated on honestly putting forward their case they would be a lot happier with the member for Cowper than they would be with him getting up in this parliament and sprouting rhetoric.

You might ask: why did the federal government give only $15,000? It was because that is what they were asked to give. They delivered what they were asked to give. Now we have the member for Cowper standing up in this parliament and playing politics by saying, 'The cane growers should have been given $25,000,' when only $15,000 was asked of the federal government. The federal government delivered what they were asked to deliver, and it is very dishonest of the member for Cowper to stand up here and try to make any other argument. What we need to do is separate fact from fiction.

I agree wholeheartedly with the member for Parkes: every member has the right to stand up here and speak on behalf of the people they represent, but let us do it in a way that is honest and that delivers a quality debate. Let us talk about the issue as it really is, not how we would like it to be. Let us not put things on the record just to score political points; rather, let us see what we can do to really help those cane farmers whose livelihoods have been devastated by these most horrendous conditions. I would attribute the abnormal wet weather to climate change; the member for Cowper would be, I think, denying its existence. We have had many adverse weather events in the area that I come from. I must say that, if the member for Cowper were prepared to support the government in putting a price on carbon so that the 500 biggest polluting industries were held to account for their behaviour, then maybe, just maybe, there would not be as many devastating climate events. I know there has been a very long period of time in the northern part of New South Wales in which there have been very adverse weather conditions and an enormous increase in the rainfall in the area, and this has had a devastating effect on the industry. I would just like to go through a few points in relation to this. Under the Natural Disaster Relief and Recovery Arrangements, each individual state determines the level of assistance to be paid, subject to caps agreed between the Commonwealth and the state. Why doesn't the member for Cowper argue that? For clean-up and recovery grants for small business and farmers, often referred to as category C grants, the NDRRA clearly provides that the Commonwealth will meet half the cost up to $25,000. This can consist of tier 1 clean-up and recovery grants of up to $5,000, not requiring any proof of damage or expenditure, and tier 2 grants of up to $20,000 for small businesses and primary producers.

I hope the member for Cowper is listening to this because it is a very important point. The government has made it clear that it is willing to meet its share of the cost of grants up to the maximum amount. That is not what the member for Cowper tells this parliament. The government has done so following the recent devastating natural disasters in Queensland, Victoria and Western Australia. It is up to the New South Wales government to determine the level of assistance they believe is to be provided and therefore the level of assistance they should be seeking from the Commonwealth. The member for Cowper should talk to his mates down in Macquarie Street and ask them to support him, not bring it up here in the federal parliament. He needs to get his National Party mates and Premier Barry O'Farrell to support him. As I said earlier, $15,000 was the amount of money that was asked for and $15,000 was what the government delivered.

The NDRRA assistance for the December 2010-January 2011 flooding was made available for 13 local government areas. Included in that were a number that fall within the member for Cowper's electorate, including Bellingen, and the electorates north of Cowper. The money that was given to these local government areas was for personal hardship and distress assistance; certain counter-disaster operations; restoration of essential public assets; concessional loans of up to $130,000 for small businesses and primary producers; concessional loans of up to $25,000 for voluntary and not-for-profit organisations, who really stepped up to the plate at that time and provided assistance and support on the ground for those people who had been adversely affected; transport freight subsidies of up to $15,000 to assist primary producers for the carriage of livestock and fodder; and clean-up and recovery grants of up to $15,000, which the member for Cowper would like to see capped at $25,000, when that was not even asked for.

The member for Cowper comes in here, he argues one way, he puts forward a point of view that really is not based on fact and he expects this parliament to take him seriously. Come on. We just cannot take anything that the member for Cowper says seriously when he comes in here and does not tell the true story, does not paint the picture as it is. The government has already responded to Mr Andrew Tickle, the General Secretary of the New South Wales Cane Growers' Association. In his motion I think the member for Cowper refers to the fact that the government has responded, but the motion has been moved. As a National Party member, he voted against the flood levy which would have assisted the people he represents in this parliament. The flood levy would have supported his communities and helped them in the recovery and reconstruction after the devastating floods.

It is up to the New South Wales government. He needs to talk to his mates in Macquarie Street to get it sorted out. He should not come in here trying to blame the federal government for the ineptitude of his colleagues in New South Wales. Just so that the member for Cowper is aware of this the next time he raises an issue such as this, natural disaster management is a state and territory responsibility under the Constitution. Each jurisdiction determines the criteria and the level of assistance provided to individuals and communities affected by natural disasters.

I am disappointed that the member for Cowper did not even do the basic research need so that he could come in here and honestly debate this legislation. The cane growers of northern New South Wales have my 100 per cent support. I know they have done it tough and they really deserve a member who comes down here and argues effectively for them.

See this speech in context