Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Tourism) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the International Fund for Agricultural Development Amendment Bill 2012. The bill before us allows Australia to accede to the Agreement Establishing the International Fund for Agricultural Development, IFAD, under Australian law.

Australia was a founding member of IFAD in 1977 and subsequently announced its intention to withdraw in 2004 under the then Howard government. In 2004 the Howard government cited its concerns as: 'limited relevance to Australia's aid program's priority countries in South-East Asia and the Pacific'; a lack of comparative advantage and focus—other organisations are more strongly involved in rural development in our region; and shortcomings in management and a failure to respond to concerns that the Australian government raised with IFAD senior management. These were the reasons for withdrawing our support. In the 2012-13 budget, the government committed $126.4 million of Australian taxpayers' money over the forward estimates to rejoin IFAD, without fully addressing the concerns raised in 2004. This is symptomatic of the government; it is bereft of any financial accountability.

This bill was sent to the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade for further consideration. The committee was asked to determine whether the International Fund for Agricultural Development has fully addressed the concerns that were raised by the former Howard government—which had prompted Australia's withdrawal from IFAD—and to consider the additional financial and human resources required by AusAID to support Australia's engagement with IFAD. It is my understanding that the number of allegations of fraud and corruption received by IFAD's Office of Audit and Oversight, AUO, had increased from five in 2004 to 41 in 2011. This is from page 6 of IFAD's 2011 Annual report on investigation and anticorruption activities.

I and all Australians have very serious concerns that the necessary changes to IFAD have not been met. I have to ask the question: why the urgent push to send money offshore when basic accountability measures have not yet been met? Whilst I support the levels of foreign aid that Australia spends, I believe that we have serious and escalating issues facing us closer to home. Our commitment to international development aid is strong and historic.

Australia has always been proportionally one of the most inclusive and generous countries in the world. However, in saying this, any Australian government has the responsibility to make sure that Australia's financial contributions achieve the outcomes they were designed to achieve.

My colleague John Cobb and the coalition as a whole understand the importance of food security as it pertains to Australia's, and to developing countries', future and internal food security. Food security and facilitating has always been a fundamental factor in Australia's commitment to regional and global aid. The ability for a nation to feed its people is a basic imperative and one that Australia cannot ignore. The acknowledgment of food security in countries around the world has developed into a centralised policy. Population growth, coupled with limited production and accessibility factors, has driven and will continue to drive food supply imperatives now and into the future. The demand for increased scientific developments and efficiencies in food production is not exclusive to developing nations. The reality is that, under current food production rates, global population will reach a critical mass—a tipping point where demand exceeds supply. The fact is that the ability of many nations to provide through production and acquisition will reach the critical point of unsustainability in the not too distant future.

Unfortunately we live in a world that is now predicated on the threat of terrorism, both past and into the future. We live in a world with threats to biosecurity. We live in a world with threats to food security. The fact is that, if not addressed, fundamentalism—not in the name of religion, but in the name of hunger—will have serious ramifications as nations struggle to feed their people. Many developed nations have acknowledged the importance of developing proactive food security policies.

During this debate I listened to the speech by the member for Wakefield who said:

When you go looking for corruption, you will of course get more reports of it. When you go looking for corruption, you will of course have more prosecutions. The greater the transparency you seek, the more instances you will turn up. That is true of any organisation.

I am not sure if he was referring to the current ICAC inquiry into former New South Wales Labor ministers Obeid and Macdonald or to the charges laid against the member for Dobell and his alleged misappropriation of HSU funding. But I say this to him and other members of the government benches: corruption and misappropriation of money should never be overlooked or discounted by any government. I am not surprised that it is a Labor government that is prepared to overlook the increase from five counts of fraud in 2004 to 41 in 2011 at the International Fund for Agricultural Development and to reinstate funding without accountability. I, for one, cannot on behalf of all Australians put the blinkers on and not demand accountability for Australians' hard-earned dollars.

I acknowledge that there have been reforms of the organisation since Australia's withdrawal from IFAD; however, it would appear from reports that our concerns have not been fully addressed. Australia's knowledge and expertise in the agricultural industry and in food security has from our inception been born of necessity, perseverance and survival. Necessity has now evolved in conjunction with world-leading scientific technologies. Australia, for a long time, has been at the forefront of agricultural best practice, biosecurity protocols and land and sea management.

As shadow minister for tourism and regional development I have had the privilege to visit individuals and businesses throughout rural and regional Australia. On a recent trip to Rockhampton, I visited Australian Reproductive Technologies and met with Simon Walton. Simon Walton has been investing and developing cutting-edge embryo and IVF technology. This technology is allowing for better efficiencies and productivity outcomes in commercial animal rearing. His IVF technology is also helping farmers restock and preserve their apex breeding herds after recent cases of Bovine Johne's Disease. More recently, I believe, Simon Walton has secured a major contract with a large Chinese dairy group to increase milk production in its herds, which will benefit both China and Australia—providing greater food security for China and income for Australia.

Closer to home in my electorate in Port Stephens, Nick Arena at Tailor Made Fish Farms has developed leading-edge aquaculture technology in barramundi farming. That technology is now being exported globally, again providing sustainable food production and returning income to Australia.

It has not been easy for these companies, or others like them—investing, taking risks, researching and developing new technologies. The fact is that the government needs to recognise the expertise and wealth of generational farming knowledge that we have right here at home in Australia. The Labor Party, in this government, has a great track record! Since coming to government, this Labor government has cut $33.4 million from cooperative research centres, cut $63 million from agricultural research within CSIRO and closed agricultural research centres in Queensland, Victoria and WA. It scrapped Land and Water Australia. The list goes on and on.

The importance of regional Australia to Australia's economy in food security and export cannot be denied or overlooked. In 2009 the current Labor government made the assessment that the Howard government's withdrawal of Australia from IFAD was warranted. The report reiterated that 'challenges remain in HR and financial management.' Australia's engagement and generosity as a regional and world citizen is well and truly documented. This government's waste and lack of accountability is also well and truly documented. In making investments in developing countries, I am drawn to the adage that if you give a man a fish, you feed him for a day; if you teach a man to fish, you feed him and his village for a lifetime. We need to use our technologies to improve food security globally and, in particular, in developing nations. Australia spends $4.8 billion in foreign aid annually. However, all Australians expect and deserve the assurance that their hard-earned money is administered and utilised well. This Labor government has continually professed it supports our farmers, but all evidence is to the contrary. While the rest of the world is running toward securing food security outcomes through technology and best practice, this government seems content walking away.

As usual, Labor talk the talk but never walk the walk, unless it is a walk away from our farmers and accountability.

We need to prioritise our foreign aid and find efficiencies and synergies with other organisations and countries to help facilitate food security outcomes for our region and throughout the world. The global landscape has dramatically changed since IFAD's creation in 1977, with other countries' sovereign wealth and ability to contribute to organisations like IFAD. Australia faces our own food production challenges—droughts, floods and other natural disasters. What we do not need is government-made disasters, which this Labor government is so prone to creating, particularly for those in regional and rural Australia. Australia is a generous nation, always prepared to offer a hand up more than a handout.

It will come as no surprise that I will oppose this bill until I am convinced that every dollar, every cent, is properly accounted for and spent where it is intended to be and that it is not lining the pockets of some corrupt individual or organisation. Again, I will oppose this bill.

See this speech in context