Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

Getting the right advice on infrastructure development is essential to maximise value for public investment and encourage private sector activity. Infrastructure is a key to future productivity growth, future jobs growth and a better quality of life for all Australians. It is therefore critical that Infrastructure Australia, the independent adviser to government, be allowed to retain its independence and be able to publish its impartial findings about the infrastructure needs of the country.

The Infrastructure Australia Amendment Bill will compromise Infrastructure Australia's independence. This bill should be withdrawn. It is an affront to the important concepts of evidence-based decision making and transparency. It has been roundly criticised by experts whose motive in offering criticism is not political but based purely on what they know about Infrastructure Australia and the broad infrastructure investment scene in this country. No less an organisation than the Business Council of Australia, representing the nation's biggest companies, has criticised this bill as an attack on Infrastructure Australia's independence. The Urban Development Association of Australia is also concerned. These people are not politicians; they are experts. We need a debate about why it is that the Abbott government wants to undermine Infrastructure Australia.

My motion today proposes that the Infrastructure Australia Amendment Bill 2013 be withdrawn and be referred to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Infrastructure and Communications. I propose this because when the Minister for Infrastructure introduced this bill he assured the House that it would strengthen Infrastructure Australia. This is clearly untrue. This bill was gagged through the House of Representatives even though it was not due to be considered until after a Senate inquiry in March. There are at least two areas where the amendments to the operation of Infrastructure Australia will be severely compromised by this bill. The fact is that Infrastructure Australia has a critical role which will be undermined if this bill is passed.

Infrastructure Australia was created by Labor in 2008. Its design was specifically focused on independence, because Labor wanted to disconnect the infrastructure investment cycle—which is necessarily long term—from the short-term political cycle. IA conducted an audit of the nation's infrastructure needs and created an infrastructure investment priority list based on the potential for a project to contribute to lifting national productivity. Importantly, it took away the piecemeal approach of examining a single project in isolation. It recognised the need for integrated approaches and released a national ports strategy, a national land freight strategy and, more recently, a national urban transport strategy.

Infrastructure Australia's recommendations were based on cold, hard facts—excluding political considerations. Any government interest in boosting productivity, and thereby opening the way for jobs growth, will be well served by following its recommendations. That is why the former Labor government funded all 15 out of 15 of the top IA recommendations for major investments. We did not pick and choose according to the electoral map; we used productivity gains as our yardstick.

This current bill will undermine the IA's independence. Firstly, the Minister for Infrastructure wants to order Infrastructure Australia about what it can and cannot research. In particular, the changes allow the minister to order IA to exclude complete classes of investment from its research considerations. This fails to understand that, when you look at transport infrastructure, you need to look at the relationship between passenger and freight, as well as the relationship between rail and road. You need to look at the way that the cities and regions function in order to get the right outcomes. This is retrospectively attempting to justify the stripping of billions of dollars from projects like the Melbourne Metro and the Cross River Rail project, both of which have been recommended by Infrastructure Australia. It is also aimed at justifying the removal of $500 million that has been allocated for Western Australian public transport projects, both in terms of light rail and also heavy rail to the airport. This move will undermine the very functioning of Infrastructure Australia.

A second change, which is just as serious, would allow the minister to prohibit Infrastructure Australia from publishing its findings. Transparency is absolutely critical. At the moment, Infrastructure Australia publishes that information. It is therefore critical that the transparent operation of Infrastructure Australia be defended. It is one of the statements that was made by the Business Council of Australia, who said in their submission to the bill:

The submission continues:

Further:

It is clear that the Business Council of Australia submission, as well as the other submissions—including Infrastructure Partnerships Australia and, indeed, the submission from the Infrastructure Australia coordinator himself—shows that they are on to what the government is aiming to do here, which is to go back to the old pork-barrelling provisions, whereby you have decisions made without proper analysis. We can see this happening in the way that funding is being allocated in Melbourne by this government, which it has foreshadowed without proper cost-benefit analysis.

It is not just the BCA; the UDIA said it:

This is absolutely critical and on Friday the Senate Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport Committee heard further concerns from Infrastructure Partnerships and the Moving People 2030 Task Force. Departmental representatives at that hearing seemed unclear as to the operation of the bill.

Last month the Treasurer played host to the G20 finance ministers in Sydney. During that meeting he strongly emphasised the need for infrastructure investment to drive global economic growth. In that objective he was right, but that is completely undermined by this legislation that was rammed through the House without proper consideration. It undermines the very reason Infrastructure Australia was established. Infrastructure Australia was established to have proper analysis of integrated plans for the way that cities, regions and the entire nation functions. Infrastructure Australia has been an enormous success that is being undermined by those promoting this change. Infrastructure Australia was a part of the creation of the new infrastructure department, and my appointment as Australia's first ever infrastructure minister was a recognition that you need integrated plans because there are interrelationships between transport, energy, water and communications, and you need a body which is able to examine those issues.

The Treasurer was right at the G20, but it is hard to believe his sincerity when the government of which he is a part is dismantling the existing evidence-based system for making decisions about infrastructure investment. It is time to stop the charade and go back to the drawing board via a full inquiry by the House of Representatives committee. That would enable proper analysis and proper input from the business and research communities to ensure that we get the right outcomes through proper legislation, and if amendments that are of merit need to be considered the opposition is certainly prepared to do that. What we are not prepared to do is exclude entire classes of transport or infrastructure developments and remove the transparency provisions that are currently there in the Infrastructure Australia legislation. I commend the motion to the House.

See this speech in context