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

I move amendment opposition (5) as circulated in my name:

(5) Schedule 1, item 14, page 7 (after line 21), after section 4A, insert:

4B Consultation with Infrastructure Australia

(1) Before approving the provision of Commonwealth funding for a Black Spot Project, Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Project, Investment Project or Transport Development and Innovation Project, the Minister must:

  (a) have regard to:

     (i) Infrastructure Priority Lists and Infrastructure Plans developed by Infrastructure Australia under the Infrastructure Australia Act 2008 to the extent relevant to the project; and

     (ii) any other advice provided by Infrastructure Australia that relates to the project; and

  (b) if capital expenditure on the project is $100 million or more—require Infrastructure Australia to give the Minister an evaluation of the project so that the Minister can decide whether to approve the project.

(2) Infrastructure Australia's evaluation of a project mentioned in paragraph (1)(b) must:

  (a) contain a cost benefit analysis of the project; and

  (b) specify the priority that Infrastructure Australia would give the project in relation to priorities specified in its current Infrastructure Plan; and

  (c) set out any other matter that Infrastructure Australia considers relevant to the project.

4C Cost benefit analyses to be made public

     If Commonwealth funding is provided for a Black Spot Project, Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Project, Investment Project or Transport Development and Innovation Project, the Minister must ensure that the following information about the project is made available on the Department's website:

  (a) a description of the project;

  (b) when the project is to start and is likely to be completed;

     (c) Infrastructure Australia's views on the project, including any evaluation provided to the Minister under section 4B.

This amendment requires the minister to require an evaluation by Infrastructure Australia prior to approving funds for land transport projects valued at over $100 million. Such an evaluation needs to include a cost benefit analysis, Infrastructure Australia's view on project priority and any other views that Infrastructure Australia considers relevant. If the project is funded by the government, the evaluation must be published on the department's website. For other projects under $100 million, the minister must have regard to Infrastructure Australia's advice and views on priorities. This is an amendment that absolutely should be supported by this parliament.

We on this side of the chamber are very proud that we created Infrastructure Australia in 2008. We did so to break the nexus between the political cycle, which by definition is very short term, and the infrastructure investment cycle, which requires a longer term perspective. It is also consistent with the amendments that we will move to the Infrastructure Australia Bill, which was gagged in this House but is before the Senate. Submissions to that inquiry—from organisations like Business Council of Australia, the Urban Development Institute of Australia, Infrastructure Partnerships Australia, and many other submissions, including, it must be said, the evidence given by the Infrastructure Coordinator—indicated how important it was that the government's attempt to gag Infrastructure Australia from providing a transparent process when it comes to infrastructure investment occurs—

Mr Briggs interjecting—

The errand boy opposite said, 'Wrong bell'. What he needs to understand—and if he were listening, he would understand—is that the amendments we have moved here, which I believe will certainly be supported in the Senate, if not in this chamber, are consistent with the amendments that will be moved to the Infrastructure Australia Bill.

What is more, they are consistent with coalition policy. The coalition went to the election saying that all projects of $100 million or more should be assessed by Infrastructure Australia before they are funded. So we are putting it into the legislation. If only for that reason, the opposition is moving this amendment with the expectation that the government will support it, because it is absolutely consistent with their policy.

This amendment provides for the further entrenchment of Infrastructure Australia. It bolts together Infrastructure Australia's role as an independent adviser to government and major government infrastructure programs. If you are going to put before the House this Land Transport Infrastructure Amendment Bill, which purports to take infrastructure development forward, without putting in the legislation a role for Infrastructure Australia, then it clearly is inadequate; it clearly is inconsistent with the rhetoric of those we see opposite. This amendment should be supported by this entire House.

The minister, if this amendment is carried, will remain able to make funding decisions as he or she sees fit. We regard that as the role of government. But there will be transparency around cost-benefit of funded projects and how funded projects stack up against national priorities. In government of course Labor provided funding for all 15 of the projects which Infrastructure Australia determined were ready to proceed on their priority list. This strengthened governance and transparency is precisely what all major stakeholders in the infrastructure sector have called for in not just the legislative inquiry but also in the Productivity Commission inquiry into public infrastructure. (Time expired)

See this speech in context