Ed Husic (Chifley, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary to the Shadow Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

What many people may not appreciate is that our central bank, the RBA, not only keeps a close watch on housing affordability but also maintains a watching brief on the diverse range of factors affecting it—factors such as infrastructure planning and the way that it affects movement of people in our cities. In the space of last year, senior RBA officials Philip Lowe and Luci Ellis have given speeches with considerable insight into RBA analysis in this area. Starting with the speech by Luci Ellis, we see a focus on the proximity of where people work to where they live, viewed across state capitals. Sitting within that speech is the observation that, 'Survey data suggest that average commute times have risen since 2006 in at least some cities'—no surprise. The RBA warned the Howard government that infrastructure blockages would generate capacity constraints within the economy. They did little about this, and we have been playing catch-up ever since.

However, the fact that commute times have risen comes as no surprise to me or my fellow Western Sydney residents. The statement confirms reality. The imperative of improving people movement across Western Sydney is obvious, and the benefits are easy to see. The economic priority is exceptionally pressing, especially when it addresses a key challenge confronting the nation—lifting productivity.

That brings me to Deputy Governor Lowe's 2013 speech, Productivity and Infrastructure, where he observed:

… there are significant opportunities for additional investment in transportation infrastructure and for using the existing infrastructure more efficiently. Doing so would promote productivity growth in Australia and contribute to advancement of the overall welfare of our citizens.

Besides making the point that under-investment in transport infrastructure affects housing affordability, Deputy Governor Lowe remarked:

… I can't help but think that surely there are investments in transport infrastructure that would yield a social rate of return greater than the cost of financing.

As a member of a federal Labor government, I was proud to see us not only lift infrastructure spending to record levels but also improve decision-making processes and project governance. We balanced our spend across projects that would help private transport opportunity with projects boosting public transport capacity. Yet, in a few months, we have seen this new government go backwards on these infrastructure priorities—badly.

Since this government has come into office, billions of dollars have whooshed out with little regard to planning or long-term thinking. In Western Sydney, for instance, the Abbott government committed nearly $2 billion to supporting the WestConnex project, a project rightly drawing criticism for not living up to its intended objectives of taking motorists straight into Sydney's CBD and ensuring that the M5 actually delivers freight through to the port. Federal Labor committed to WestConnex on the basis that the New South Wales government addressed these flaws, and the Abbott government hid those flaws under a pile of taxpayer cash.

The Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Anthony Albanese, rightly observed:

… when governments spend billions of scarce public dollars on new roads or rail lines they ought to be certain upfront that they get it right and that the investment delivers on the desired outcome.

If you arm yourself with a calculator, a clutch of government press releases and Google maps you will paint a mess of projects sprawling across the country. A trail of zeroes will cram your calculator screen, but amongst all that you will not find much cost-benefit analysis. To make matters worse they are watering down infrastructure governance, limiting the Infrastructure Australia board's capacity to independently determine priority order of projects.

Nothing better demonstrates the cavalier attitude of the government to infrastructure planning than Badgerys Creek airport. You will not hear those last three words roll off the Abbott government ministers' tongues because they refer to it as 'Sydney's second airport' or 'Western Sydney's first airport'. They are worried about this airport, and rightly so. That is why they do not call it 'Badgerys Creek airport'—the airport that dare not speak its name!

It is why Deputy Prime Minister Warren Truss calls MP briefings on it but does not show up to lead the briefings. A couple of weeks ago when the PM was brave enough to talk publicly about Badgerys, he made a telling slip when he finally managed to mention it. He was addressing the The Daily Telegraph's Champions of the West awards night, and of course talking about Badgerys Creek in front of The Daily Telegraph is about as hard as driving an ice-cream van through a sweaty neighbourhood—they have been feverishly campaigning for it. During his speech, the PM slipped when he said, 'There should not be burden without benefit'—I repeat: 'burden without benefit', which says it all.

At the Badgerys Creek compound they chant about two benefits. The first is roads—three of them built around the airport—and the other is jobs. But they fail to mention detail. The roads have been described by the assistant minister for tar, the member for Mayo, as Western Sydney's 'economic plan'—three roads and an airport and, presto, an economic plan! The lack of detail on one of the biggest road projects, boasted by the government, does not even have a completion date; in fact, it says it is just going to be completed before the airport is built. All spin and no substance, and for an airport that we are told is supposed to create 60,000 jobs and will only create five. When it comes to infrastructure, it is clear that this government does not have a clue and does not have a sense of what it is going to be spending its money on. (Time expired)

Debate interrupted.

See this speech in context