Melissa Price (Durack, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I'm definitely powerful; I have a very large electorate, and a very large agricultural sector. I can assure the last speaker that we are very focused on the needs of regional Australia, together with my National Party colleagues. I must say it was very pleasing to hear the last speaker actually talk a little bit about farmers, because I was a bit concerned that maybe we weren't even going to focus on farmers in this debate—so, credit to the last speaker.

But anyway, let's get to the bill. We know that this bill establishes the Regional Investment Corporation, which I will from now on call the RIC, which will deliver the Commonwealth's concessional loan scheme, removing this funding from the state bodies that currently administer them. This is simply because the current system significantly inhibits our ability as a government—that is my personal view, given I'm from Western Australia, and I'll talk about that a little later—and this bill will allow us to respond to changing conditions on the ground for farmers, which, as we know, will change from season to season. For example, in my electorate of Durack, we know that the Wheatbelt and the Mid West have had some excellent years in a row—not so at the moment; it's a bit patchy. The rain has arrived late for many of the farmers in the Mid West of my electorate and also in the north-eastern Wheatbelt and it may have arrived just in time for many of the farmers in the central Wheatbelt, but it certainly won't be the bumper season for wheat and canola that we've seen of late.

Our ability, as a government, to assist those farmers in the north-eastern portion of the Wheatbelt and throughout the Mid West is hampered by the current model for distributing these concessional loans to our state governments, who in turn distribute it to the farmers. In short, it's going through a second pair of hands. When you're a farmer in need of help, you need direct help; you don't want to wait for another layer of bureaucracy. We all know that cutting out the middleman is going to quicken the process. We're ensuring that, by cutting out the middleman, the loan decisions are being made on the same criteria and basis across the country. I can guarantee you that is not happening at the moment. This means that the federal government concessional loans will be on the same terms, no matter which state or territory of this country you live in. That is, simply, fair and reasonable governance of Commonwealth taxpayer funds.

Further to its function of delivering concessional loans for farmers, the RIC will also be able to deliver loans for state and territory governments for water resource management projects in the future. I encourage the Western Australia government to put their thinking cap on and start thinking about the types of projects it may wish to have the federal government involved in. Personally, I'm thrilled that my electorate is now going to have this facility available for concessional loans for water. I am lucky enough to have a fantastic example in my electorate of the federal and state governments working together to manage and enhance water resources. I'm talking about the Ord River project, up near Kununurra. This is a great example of both levels of government coming together to develop a real, thriving, diverse agricultural industry in a very remote part of the east Kimberly. In fact, I had the pleasure of being there only a couple of weeks ago. I went out to the end of Ord stage 2, to the Northern Territory border, and had the obligatory photo taken. What we've been able to achieve out there is truly remarkable. I'm very pleased that the federal government continues to support the Ord River development. We have committed $5 million to a feasibility study for Ord stage 3. We'll take the Ord River development across the Western Australia border into the Northern Territory. The Western Australia government and the Northern Territory government will need to work together to bring the benefit of Ord stage 3 to Australia.

We know these concessional and water infrastructure loans are important for many reasons. They will facilitate further investment in the agricultural industry. At a local level they will support businesses and communities against the devastating effects that drought can bring—we've seen that just recently—but they will also support the farming businesses where, for whatever reason, they're in need of a concessional loan. That's what we are doing, and we've heard from all our speakers on this side about how we all think this is a very good idea and is supporting the farming industry.

But let's talk about those opposite, because I think it's worth having a look at their record and their support for the agricultural industry in this country. Let us not forget the past actions of those members opposite. How could we forget that knee-jerk, community-destroying decision on the cattle live export ban, over which this government, as we stand here today, is being sued for an amount of $600 million?

I mean, how careless can you be? They are the party ripping money out of the agricultural sector so that they can prop up their legion of other policy failures, which of course include things like the 5,000 people who died at sea and also those young men who died installing pink batts. They literally cut the federal agriculture department's funding in half. Yet the member for Hunter has the gall to enter this House and propose an amendment that calls this government self-serving in terms of this piece of legislation. We all know what he would do if Labor were on this side of the House. The regions would again be an afterthought. We have seen that time and time again here, as part of this debate, where there's been no focus on exactly what we're talking about here. Rather, they are talking about politics and issues relating to the Deputy Prime Minister. That's not what we're here to do today. We're here to talk about how as a government we can actually help the agriculture industry. We know that the regions would again be an afterthought, as the Labor Party would pick up where they left off, destroying our economy with their economic vandalism. Those members opposite don't care about drought relief. We saw that when we came to office in 2013, because there was nothing in place to support farmers in trouble; nothing for us to inherit that was going to support the agricultural regions.

Let's look at what Labor did cut during their six years of government and perhaps do a bit of a comparison. As I said previously, they cut the ag department's budget in half. The live export ban could cost the Australian public some $600 million plus the damage done to international supply chains, regional communities here and investor faith in government stability in Australia. All of that was put at risk. They removed the exceptional circumstances drought support policy and they abolished Land and Water Australia. They wanted to remove the research and development levy from the control of farmers so that they could decide what to spend the farmers' money on. This is Labor's agricultural record. No wonder we didn't get much of a contribution from those opposite today, because, quite frankly, they don't get the agricultural region and they don't get farmers, so they have nothing to contribute.

The Australian public and Australian farmers deserve better than what they were served up. Interestingly enough, in 2016, when I was manning a polling booth in Geraldton, which is in the heart of my electorate in Western Australia, a gentleman came up to me, shook my hand and told me he was voting Liberal. I said, 'Thank you very much, that's good of you.' He said, 'Well, I wouldn't be voting Labor.' I said. 'Why is that?' He said, 'Labor's live export ban.' I can only assume he was a farmer. It was some five years ago when Labor signed off on that policy, but farmers don't forget. Why would they, when the government turned its back on them? The member for Hunter and the rest of those opposite should heed that warning. Farmers have very long memories and they won't forget.

In fact, we've seen this with many of the contributions here today. As I said earlier, the member for Bendigo didn't mention farmers once. I would have to go through Hansard, and I'm happy to be corrected if I don't get it right, but I think she did not mention farmers once. This particular corporation we are talking about—the Regional Investment Corporation—will actually be there to serve. That is the point of this legislation: a corporation which is there to serve. It should not have been about the public servants within the corporation, but unfortunately that's what the member for Bendigo was more interested in talking about.

Let's talk about why this bill is required. In our current system, which the coalition had to fix up in 2013 when we arrived, we knew that there were no concessional loan schemes. So we negotiated with various state and territory governments. This system may work great if your state government has reached a suitable agreement with the federal government. But, sadly, in Western Australia we witnessed a very slow and cumbersome system, despite everyone's best efforts, which led to minimal take-up from our farmers. So the system that we've currently got would, if Labor had their way, be to say to a farmer in Victoria or New South Wales, 'Well, you're okay, because the current system suits you, but if you happen to be a farmer in Kununurra, or if you are a farmer from the Wheatbelt, or if you are a farmer from the midwest, then we, the federal government, will not be there to support you.' And I think that's quite absurd. We actually need to fix the current system that we've got.

Those opposite who are arguing against this legislation—or, frankly, not even talking about the legislation—are really arguing that the farmers of the Northern Territory—because they've also suffered the same—and Western Australia are not worth helping. Well, quite frankly, I think that's ridiculous, and I don't agree with that. I believe that all farmers in Australia should be treated equally by our government, which is why I'm a supporter of removing the concessional loan scheme arrangements from the states and returning them to the federal government with the creation of the new Regional Investment Corporation. This will ensure equity in the system across states and territories, ensuring that federal money is spent equitably.

The current system we've got is not the federal government's fault, as the government has negotiated in good faith with all states and territories, and it's certainly not Labor's fault either. They had no real agricultural policy when they left office, so we can't exactly blame them for the current mess—especially for those farmers in Western Australia—because we started from a standing start. I don't believe it's the Western Australian government's fault either, because these things happen, it isn't always the way we would like it to be, and I think they used all their best efforts. But that's beside the point: it's not about whose fault it is, because the only people who are currently suffering from the current arrangement that we have are the farmers of Western Australia. Some of the hardest working men and women in one of the biggest growth industries in the country are currently being hamstrung by our current arrangements, and I don't think that's good enough.

With the time remaining, I just want to be able to assure the farmers and the pastoralists of my electorate that I'm doing everything I can to ensure that the federal government supports them with respect to the concessional loan scheme. It's also a shout-out to the Western Australian government, because I would like them to get organised with respect to what water policies they might be coming to talk to us about. By July 2018, we will have the federal concessional loan body set up to deliver this service to the farmers. On that basis, I commend this bill to the House.

See this speech in context