Steven Ciobo (Moncrieff, Liberal Party, Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment) Share this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Parkes for his question, because it goes to something we, on this side of the House, are passionate about, which is: boosting Australia's exports. On this side of the House, like the member for Parkes, we are also passionate about making sure that Australians have jobs in Australia's resources sector.

One of the ways that we're doing that, I was pleased to announce today, is through Efic. Efic is, of course, our export credit agency. Over the last financial year, Efic has provided some $400 million worth of finance for around 170 export contracts. What the Turnbull coalition government are doing is making sure we're giving Efic the tools it needs to do even more to support our exporters in terms of taking exports overseas, driving our economy and creating job growth here in Australia. Last week we saw the Efic amendment bill pass through the parliament, which will allow Efic to offer a broader range of support to exporters. Today, I was pleased to build upon this. We are doing so through increasing the scope under Efic's statement of expectations so that Efic has got more ability to finance onshore resource projects.

I note that the member has asked about what some of the radical groups are doing that is threatening this. The fact is that we are seeing a campaign. We've seen, for example, the stepped-up campaigning of activist groups which is discouraging our major retail banks from financing otherwise-viable exporters in the coal sector. But it's not just about coal. It's also about what we can do in other sectors within resources, including—and I note this is in the member for Parkes's own area—Alkane's Dubbo rare earths project, which is going to help to drive exports and create more jobs.

But the simple fact is that there are other radical plans that we are seeing. We increasingly see it from the Labor opposition. I was having a look recently at what the member for Sydney said—talking about radical action groups. The member for Sydney said: 'In environmental terms'—these are her words—'we're looking at losing Kakadu National Park and losing the ability to feed ourselves.' That's what the member for Sydney says about what is happening in terms of coal exports.

We should also recognise that, typical of the Australian Labor Party, who like to walk both sides of the street, if you're a radical greenie concerned about kale, then you can go with the member for Sydney. But, if you're a more sensible person who's concerned about coal, I guess you could go with the Leader of the Opposition, who says:

I am not a rampant greenie who thinks there is no place for fossil fuel in our energy mix in the future …

That's the problem with the shifty member opposite. It doesn't matter which side you want to put forward, whether it's the radical green element that's represented by the member for Sydney or it's someone trying to masquerade as being more mainstream. The fact is that the Australian Labor Party have no fixed position. They'll walk both sides of the street on this issue, and only the coalition is willing to make the hard decisions.(Time expired)

See this speech in context