Barnaby Joyce (New England, National Party, Minister for Agriculture) Share this | Hansard source

It is great to be able to rise to my feet to show yet another issue that the National Party has been in pursuit of being delivered, which is the change to the Foreign Investment Review Board guidelines. So often, I rise to my feet to say: 'The issue with the Labor Party is that they just don't have any policies. The only thing they can ever do is comment on our policies—our agricultural policies—because they just do not have any.' But today that is not the case, because we do have a difference in policy. We believe that the Australian people have a right to review when an individual from overseas buys a property worth $15 million or more. That is our view. We believe that people have a right to know, because it is their nation.

Mr Fitzgibbon interjecting—

Mr Clare interjecting—

And the Labor Party have a position too—and to the people of Canning: I hope you hear this. The Labor Party believe that you do not have the right to know until a purchase goes over $1,000 million. In Canning, a person from overseas can buy the north of the electorate on Monday, the south of the electorate on Tuesday, the west of the electorate on Wednesday and the east of the electorate on the next day, and it never has to go the Foreign Investment Review Board. It never has to go there. Well, this is the difference, and this is a sign that the Labor Party, when it comes to agricultural land in this nation, has just completely and utterly lost the plot and is obviously not talking to the people on the land. They want to know. They have a right to know. It is, after all, their country.

Even today, we had the shadow minister at the dispatch box talking about concerns with Asian investment. It is not the Asian investment review board; it is the Foreign Investment Review Board. He is deliberately, once again, stoking the fires that he has started—fires that he can see in The Weekly Times, today, where they are saying, 'Save the FTA.'

Who does not want to have a free trade agreement? Who has been ambiguous at best about a free trade agreement with China—our biggest agricultural trading partner? It is the Labor Party. The Labor Party is standing in the way of our negotiations with our biggest trading partner. And it is not just the tariffs that will be removed if we get this through, it is also the sentiment—and that is just as powerful. I thought that someone from the Labor Right would have the capacity to stand up in their caucus and take on those former grandchildren of the BLF and make sure that this free trade agreement goes through. But, of course, you will not do that because you do not have the ticker to take them on.

So here we are, we are supporting this—I am proud to say that it is a policy that the National Party has been pursuing, and it is great to see it delivered—and making sure that the Australian people will have the right to review land purchased that is valued at more than $15 million—not banned, reviewed. It can be paid for if there are lots of people—you are saying lots and lots of people coming to buy land. I am not surprised; it is a great asset. That is why ABARES today has told us that gross agricultural output will go up by eight per cent—remarkable! What a marvellous government; what a great outcome. Somebody must be doing something right. And of course it is.

Let me go through some of the pertinent details of this. When you say the United States, you are dead right: in some states of the United States foreigners are not allowed to buy land at all. They are just not allowed. If I go to China, I cannot buy land at all. I am not allowed. Not even their own people are allowed. If you go to Japan, you cannot buy it; Korea, you cannot buy it; Indonesia, it is highly restricted. Even New Zealand is vastly more restricted than Australia. Australia remains the most liberal country on earth, and the Australian people have a right to know what is happening in their country. We are going to give them that right. And the people who are standing in the way of that right, the people who want to change it so that you do not know, who want to keep it hidden from you, are the Australian Labor Party. Isn't that bizarre? They have one position where they want to block the Chinese free trade agreement—and we know exactly why they are doing it; it is just dog whistle politics—and yet they have another position on this: when we say that Australian people have a right to know, they do not believe in that. Do not tell the Australian people; do not let them know.

This bill comes in three parts. The first one is the reduction in thresholds, and one part of that is agribusiness. Agribusiness, by its own function, has the capacity to dominate large sections of an agricultural precinct. If you control a sugar mill you, naturally enough, control all of the sugar farms around it because they do not have the capacity to just pick up their product and take it somewhere else; it is vitally important. If you control an abattoir in a certain area, you might control a certain line of cattle that certain people produce, and that can have major effects. If you control certain strategic assets in certain areas—dairy production facilities—inherently, ipso facto, you have control over the farms. We have seen this. Certainly the best example is in railway lines. Once people have control of a railway line, they just keep on putting up the prices to take the margin from all of the people who have to move their produce by rail. We do not want that; it is not good for our economy. We want to make sure that we have a strong economy, and we want to make absolutely certain that the Australian people know what is going on.

We have already started the passage of this: as of 1 July, the Australian Taxation Office will start delivering the information so that Australian people can basically see who owns what. That will either dispel people's concerns, or maybe, in some instances, it could confirm people's concerns. One of the most sacred duties we have is the proper oversight—

See this speech in context