Cathy McGowan (Indi, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I'm very pleased to stand here today in the House and support Treasury Laws Amendment (2017 Measures No. 4) Bill 2017, particularly in relation to the wine equalisation tax, known as the WET rebate. I'd like to acknowledge two colleagues in the House, my neighbours the member for Farrer and the member for Riverina—lovely to have you here.

In support of this legislation, I want to make three main points. I'd like to acknowledge the leadership shown by Senator Anne Ruston in this process. I'd like to acknowledge the role of the leaders in the wine industry, particularly in my electorate, for the work they've done. I'd like to point out how, when government has strong process, we get good results. And I just heard the member for Perth's comment about how often it is in parliament, actually, that we do come together in agreement around legislation. So I want to talk a little bit about process and how important it is for outcomes.

The amendments to the wine equalisation tax act will provide the integrity to the wine equalisation tax producer rebate that we've heard about. There are many, many advantages in it. Like the previous speaker said, the wine industry is really important in my electorate. It's important as an agricultural, tourism and regional development success story. In my electorate of Indi, viticulture and tourism are two of the biggest industries. Of the 21 official wine regions found in Victoria, six of them are in north-east Victoria. In addition to producing high-quality wine, they provide high-quality vineyard dining, behind-the-scenes tours and cellar door experiences. Together, in regional Victoria, they generate $13.3 billion in revenue; 13,000 direct jobs; and over 32,000 indirect jobs, mostly in the tourism sector. So, as we have been saying today, it is really important. And the wine industry has strong leadership.

I mentioned briefly Senator Anne Ruston. I would like to also acknowledge her chief of staff, Con. To the leadership team in the departments, who I know have played a really significant role in bringing this legislation to today: I acknowledge you and congratulate you.

The process commenced in March 2015 with the Senate inquiry into the Australian wine industry. This inquiry looked at, among other things, the impact and application of the rebate on grape and wine industry supply chains. The committee heard evidence from a large number of sources that the rebate was working against profitability in the industry, and reform was needed. This was followed in May 2015 by the Treasury preparing a discussion paper examining the WET rebate, and the paper formed part of the tax white paper process. And do I like a white paper process! I say to the ministers at the table: give us a white paper on regional development; give us a really thorough policy development process. White papers—great!

Following the wine industry's response to the 2016 budget, ministers Anne Ruston and Kelly O'Dwyer led a national consultation program with the wine industry that resulted in key changes to the eligibility criteria. Do I like a national consultation process? I have to say yes. Give us a white paper, or give us a national consultation paper, led by the two relevant ministers, and involve industry. It was really well done. The result was a clear demonstration of how vigorous process and a clear framework gave us genuine engagement. Industry got behind this in a big way. Local leaders became involved in the conversation, became involved in politics, and became involved in parliament.

Particularly, in this instance, I want to acknowledge the leadership in my own electorate: a huge call-out to Colin Campbell as a board member of the Winemakers' Federation of Australia, and to Belinda Chambers as chair of Winemakers of Rutherglen. In the initial days, they called me to a meeting, sat me down as a new member of parliament, and explained how it worked for the industry. They worked at the local level not only to bring me into the debate but also to bring the industry together to discuss key issues, and identified mechanisms required to address barriers. We worked bottom-up, middle-up, and then top-down.

I'd also like to acknowledge the work of Janelle Boynton in her role at that time as chair of Regional Development Australia. A huge call-out to the minister: Regional Development Australia, a terrific institution, needs all the support it can get. Janelle was the chair at the time. She brought her experience of the wine industry, her links with tourism, and her commitment to regional development. She came to my office as part of our volunteer program, spent a week here in parliament and advocated strongly across political lines for this legislation to be considered as part of broader challenges facing the industry. She did a mountain of work. So, thank you, Janelle, for your time.

I have to say that during all this time, industry people worked for free. They were not paid. They gave up their time. There were numerous meetings and numerous trips to Canberra, and they all covered their own costs. For that contribution that leaders in rural and regional Australia make out of their own pocket to work the politics of the country, I just think we can never say thank you enough. I particularly want to name some of the leaders, again in my electorate, who wrote to me, organised meetings, provided input into the debate, came and visited me all over the place, and got their committees together. So, at the risk of leaving some important people out: Michael Freudenstein from Alpine Valleys, Simon Grant from Beechworth, Michael and Nancy Reid from Glenrowan, John Darling from the King Valley, John Adams from Mansfield, and Belinda and Michael Chambers from Rutherglen, thank you for your work, your time and your dedication.

The benefit of a process like this is twofold. It allowed for rigorous discussion on the issues, but it also provided an opportunity to identify other issues that needed to be picked up by the industry. In this case, the other issue was picked up for us—particularly for me as a border member of parliament. If I could just draw attention to my colleague the member for Farrer, we have a particular issue on our border that came up as part of this inquiry regarding the mutual recognition of the accreditation for people to work in the wine industry around the responsible serving of alcohol—the RSA certificate. For the benefit of the parliament, if you work selling wine in Victoria, you have to get an RSA in Victoria, and if you work selling wine in New South Wales, you need an RSA in New South Wales—and a separate one for Canberra, and around the country. The high cost to the industry of getting all the staff their respective RSAs, the duplication and the red tape came up during this process.

I have long advocated for a nationally recognised RSA certification. But I fear that, in the many years we have come through the process, getting harmony between New South Wales and Victoria—well, let's see if we can just get Victoria and New South Wales working together rather than the nation. I have written to the Victorian Premier on this, and I'd be seeking the support of my colleagues in New South Wales, if I could—the members for Riverina and Farrer—to work together with me on this crossborder anomaly and on how we can get harmonisation of certificates between Victoria and New South Wales so that our industry workers do not get disadvantaged by the overduplication in this particular area. I issue that call-out to the industry to see how we can continue to work together on this one.

In closing my comments, I would like to say how much I have appreciated this particular process. Not only, as the member for Perth said, has it resulted in savings, but it has also done something that the community of Australia is constantly asking us to do: to have good governance; to have good, clear process; to work with industry to get a result; to work with our communities. And I think with this particular legislation we have done it. I'd like to acknowledge the minister at the table, the member for Higgins. I thank you for your role in it, because I know that, together with Anne, you've worked superbly well on it, and we've really appreciated it. So, the process has been good, the collaboration has been good, and the leadership has been strong and consistent, as well as the outcomes we've got as a result of it.

I'd like to make a final call to the members on the government side. We really do know how to do this. We're good at it. But we don't do it nearly enough. And my particular call is in the area of regional development—this ability for leadership, this ability to consult and to have good government processes so that the bigger areas that we're now looking at can actually come to the parliament and we have clear agreement across the parliament about how we need to work together. I'm currently involved in an inquiry headed by the member for Groom. We're looking at regional development and how it works. Perhaps I could use this opportunity just briefly to call on my colleagues in the parliament to get behind this inquiry. If we can actually learn the lessons from this WET rebate and bring it to regional development, bring small business together with industry, with parliament, with the Treasury, with the Public Service and look at what the grand picture is, if I could dare be bold enough to say that, and then have a white paper process and have the consultation process and then bring in a long-term view—more than three years—of how we actually want rural and regional Australia to work, then I think we could do some good work.

But, in bringing my comments to a close, congratulations to all concerned, particularly my electorate, because I know they did a huge amount of work, and I know that other winegrowing areas clearly did their heavy lifting as well. But particularly to the ministers at the table, congratulations; well done. I'm absolutely delighted to support the legislation.

See this speech in context