Warren Truss (Wide Bay, National Party, Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Hansard source

He certainly cannot count. It was a disingenuous statement, to say the least. This is a 55 per cent increase on what Labor had put in its forward estimates for the same term, a 55 per cent increase on Labor's commitments. I know that Labor had made commitments to a number of projects, but generally there were conditions attached. For instance, they were happy to put money onto the Pacific Highway but only if New South Wales paid half—even though they had never expected that when the Labor Party was in office in the state government of New South Wales. They were happy to put money into the Bruce Highway, again only if the formula was changed from the traditional 80-20 mix to 50-50. Even then, Labor's offer was $2.6 billion less.

There are 27 projects over the period of our Bruce Highway program that we had committed to, that Labor was not interested in. In the budget, announced last week, we committed to continuing funding for 16 projects already underway—and some of those were obviously started in the time of the previous government—but we also promised to fund in this budget 45 new projects. So there is no comparison in which side of politics was most committed to the Bruce Highway. But let us go further. Yes, the Labor Party promised to spend money on Gateway North in Brisbane, but only if the road was tolled. They said they would support WestConnex in Sydney, but only if it was not tolled.

So there is not much logic in what they are proposing to do. They were prepared to spend money on South Road in Adelaide, but only at one end. They were prepared to spend money on the North West roads in Western Australia and the Swan Valley bypass, but only if the proceeds could be taken out of the mining tax, which had raised no money. When it comes to things like the Toowoomba Range and the East West Link, Labor still opposes those projects, and yet we will be funding them as a part of our major investment strategy. So in reality, any attempt by the opposition to suggest that somehow or other our massive investment in infrastructure is little different from what Labor intended to do just defies all credibility.

Returning to the legislation before the House, I would have thought it was uncontroversial. This is a simple piece of tidying up, while the issues raised in the amendment are hardly offensive. We all agree that rail has an important role to play in the future transport network of our nation. There is $3.6 billion in the budget this year for rail projects. We continue to work on the prospects of there being a high-speed rail project proceed in Australia, at some stage in the future. We have a real financial commitment to starting the Melbourne to Brisbane railway line, perhaps the most important new freight-rail project in the country. Those commitments are there and those commitments are real. In this particular case, the amendment distracts from the legislation that is before the parliament and therefore we will not support the amendment, but I commend the built the house.

See this speech in context