Kylea Tink (North Sydney, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I move amendments (1) to (4), as circulated in my name, together:

(1) Schedule 1, item 4, page 7 (after line 29), after section 5D, insert:

5DA Functions — annual statements

(1) Infrastructure Australia must, during each financial year, prepare and give to the Minister the following:

(a) an annual statement to inform the annual budget process on infrastructure investment;

(b) an annual statement on the performance outcomes being achieved from the investment program and existing project initiatives.

(2) Infrastructure Australia must:

(a) make each annual statement available on Infrastructure Australia's website as soon as practicable after giving the statement to the Minister; and

(b) cause a copy of each annual statement to be tabled in each House of the Parliament within 15 sitting days of that House after giving the statement to the Minister.

(2) Schedule 1, page 8 (after line 9), after item 5, insert:

5A Paragraph 6B(a)

After "consumer,", insert "community,".

(3) Schedule 1, page 8 (after line 14), after item 6, insert:

6A Subparagraph 39B(b)(i)

After "consumer", insert ", community".

(4) Schedule 1, item 8, page 9 (after line 13), after subitem (5), insert:

(5A) Section 5DA of the Infrastructure Australia Act 2008, as inserted by this Part, applies in relation to a financial year starting on or after the commencement of this item.

I rise today to move my amendments to Infrastructure Australia Amendment (Independent Review) Bill 2023. I think it is one of my predecessors who actually said it best. Ted Mack, the only other independent to ever hold the seat of North Sydney, said:

… government should be totally open to public scrutiny and elected representatives should enable people to not only participate in all decisions that affected them, but to ultimately find ways to have people make decisions for themselves.

… the very basis of democracy is that a decision taken by the public as a whole would be right more often than decisions taken by an elite group …

My first amendment, then, is straightforward on the face of it. It's just the insertion of one simple but vital word, and that word is 'community'.

A community is a group of people who are similar in some way, who have something in common. In the context of my electorate of North Sydney, one of the things my community has in common is a deep concern for the quality of our environment, with clean air, shade for tree canopy and habitat for wildlife—all things which are currently being significantly impacted. There are currently three major infrastructure projects directly impacting my community for which we are not seeing effective, modern, resilient planning responses. They are the upgrade of the Warringah Freeway, the development of the Western Harbour Tunnel and planning around the Beaches Link. There are a multitude of smaller infrastructure projects, like sport and recreation facilities and bike ramps, that also lead to significant impact.

As it stands, the bill requires Infrastructure Australia to consult with government, commercial, industrial, consumer, academic and professional bodies or organisations, but not with community. In this way, this bill continues Infrastructure Australia's focus on economic and productivity gains for infrastructure, but it does not fully account for the social and community needs of our collective society, nor does it allow or require the organisation to look at the overall impact of any and all infrastructure projects or measures such as quality of life or the right of all to a safe and healthy environment. While the act does reference consumers, I do not believe that reference is adequate, as a consumer is a person who purchases goods or services for personal use; individuals with individual motivations and needs. Stronger outcomes will be reached if groups of people—that is, communities—whether brought together by geography or interest, have an equal say. Ultimately, through the development of infrastructure it is communities that are squeezed from all directions while the consumer will benefit frequently. If a body such as Infrastructure Australia is not mandated to look at the entire picture, who is?

In this context, my amendment dramatically increases the role of communities like my community of North Sydney in the development of and decision-making around infrastructure projects. The amendment would strengthen the community benefit considerations that are assessed when Infrastructure Australia looks at the value of infrastructure projects, audits existing infrastructure, compiles lists of priorities and develops plans, as well as when it is developing corporate plans and providing advice to governments and investments.

My second amendment relates to transparency around Infrastructure Australia's advice. It would legislate recommendation 4 of the 2020 review, which called for two new annual statements to be tabled in parliament in the interests of transparency and accountability. All members in this place, as well as the media and voters, should be able to review the reports on the performance outcomes being achieved from the investment of taxpayer funds. It's disappointing that the government has not accepted this recommendation from the review. The government's response to this recommendation has been to hide behind a shield of cabinet deliberations, but I find this argument uncompelling. There is nothing to lose in allowing others to see what informed conversations are taking place, for ultimately, it is only this sort of transparency that will enable Australians to see exactly what information and whose agenda is driving which decisions. The direction the cabinet goes will remain the cabinet's decision, but the decision should be able to be scrutinised in full light. For the Labor government to shy away from this level of transparency is to make it no less likely to pork-barrel than the last government, and surely Australians have made it clear that this has got to stop.

Ultimately, both amendments, while simple, would enhance and improve the engagement of our communities in the planning of infrastructure, and I believe the government should support them. Thank you.

See this speech in context