Bernie Ripoll (Oxley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is said that infrastructure structure planning provides the platform for regional economic growth. If this is the case then we need to provide the framework and the mechanisms that will enable the federal government to facilitate land use planning which in turn will support regional development and the ongoing delivery of regionally significant infrastructure.

The Commonwealth has taken a significant step in this regard by commencing a program focused on creating a stronger and more participatory regional development structure. Things such as Infrastructure Australia, Regional Development Australia and the Major Cities Unit are all key components of this structure that has been designed to foster and facilitate the nation’s future development. These already established initiatives, together with the $20 billion Building Australia Fund and the current environment of close collaboration through all tiers of government, have created a unique opportunity to ensure a new alignment between the previously disparate regional planning and infrastructure programming activities. But, to solve the problems, we must first understand what the full challenges are.

The challenges can best be described in the context of four broad themes underpinning the nation’s development. The first is to meet the economic development challenges. This can be done through the transport infrastructure network, which plays an integral part in supporting economic growth throughout the nation. With the private sector investments across mining, resource and industrial sectors forecast to continue at unprecedented levels, government needs to continue to ensure that road and rail networks support the ongoing competitiveness of our major industries into the future. But we must also meet the regional and urban challenges in a changing social and demographic environment. Persisting growth such as in Western Australia and Queensland means that there is more pressure for governments to get it right and to meet the challenges in those networks in both transport and population. We also need to meet the funding challenge. An increasing scale of infrastructure means that we have to keep finding new ways to fund and resource those projects, and there are ways to do this. Finally, we need to meet the delivery challenges. The expenditure of limited public funds means that all governments have to look very closely at how they actually deliver and bring forward those projects.

South-East Queensland is one of the nation’s regions where those challenges are most acute because of the huge growth and development happening in that region. Unique to Queensland—though I know one of the other states has something similar—is an infrastructure regulatory regime which is part of the State Development and Public Works Organisation Act 1971. I particularly want to mention that because this declaration gives the power to the state to form state development areas for the purpose of promoting that infrastructure coordination and growth, which I think is very important. But, secondly, it also gives sight to a program of works that can be planned, funded, programmed, delivered and coordinated. If at a federal level we can look at doing similar things—which we are already through our Major Cities Unit and Infrastructure Australia—then we are on the right path in getting to that position.

One of the biggest issues we have is how to fully coordinate strategic regional infrastructure development. I believe very strongly that one way we could make a real difference would be to set up—as Queensland has—a coordinator-general’s position focusing specifically on what could be federal regional development zones, tackling the issues of infrastructure and regional development and giving the federal government, the Commonwealth, a real role to play. Historically that is being done at a state level, and I think that there is a real opportunity for us with the institutions that we have established. The role would encompass things such as identifying areas within a state with the potential to be economic or industrial hubs, planning for sustainability and growth into the future and working with state development areas in controlling and being part of their development schemes as well. Land could also be acquired where necessary to ensure that critical projects and infrastructure facilities of significance to the state but also to the Commonwealth progress in a strategic manner. Individuals, government departments or government created organisations could be engaged to carry out those functions and ensure that they work.

Identification of a significant project would not be lightly decided. It is very similar to what we are doing with Infrastructure Australia. These are subjects and projects of national significance. They would follow the criteria of complex approval requirements, including those imposed by local, state and federal governments, with high levels of investment by the states and so forth. If we want to see strategic development of infrastructure and regional development in this more complex world then the Commonwealth government needs to play a major role. We are doing that through a number of units that we have set up. I think there is more in that space. (Time expired)

Luke Hartsuyker (Cowper, National Party, Deputy Leader of Opposition Business in the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well developed infrastructure allows for the expansion of industry in regional areas, and for improved services more generally. The expansion of new industries in regional areas brings jobs and it also helps indirectly by promoting growth in the retail sector and for service providers in our regions.

The sea change and tree change phenomena have seen significant numbers of people leaving the big cities and moving to regional centres such as Coffs Harbour, Kempsey, Maclean and the towns of the Nambucca and Bellinger valleys. This increased population is putting strain on our regional areas. The task of providing infrastructure to meet the needs created by these massive population shifts is daunting indeed. We need improvements in major infrastructure, such as road links like the Pacific Highway or rail links like the east coast rail line. We also need new infrastructure at a local level such as facilities that support cultural activities like music and the arts. In Coffs Harbour we need a permanent home for the regional conservatorium, continued improvement in infrastructure for internet users, new bridges and upgraded indoor sports facilities, to name just a few.

This motion ignores the massive contribution that has been made by the Howard government in the area of infrastructure. Far from being a missed opportunity, the Howard years saw unprecedented investment in national infrastructure projects. With the AusLink program, the former government spent billions of dollars upgrading our land transport infrastructure. AusLink was introduced in 2002 and was Australia’s first national land transport plan. It revolutionised the way that the federal government provides funding for our road and rail infrastructure. AusLink set aside almost $16 billion for land transport projects. AusLink 2, announced in the 2007 budget, will provide almost $23 billion over four years to 2013-14.

The impact of that locally in my electorate is seen in projects such as the Bonville deviation. Some $245 million has been spent to remove an accident black spot. The official opening was held yesterday and the road should be open for traffic this week. Unfortunately, in the past the New South Wales government has ignored the need to upgrade the road around Bonville, with tragic results. A number of fatalities have been recorded on that stretch of road. The New South Wales government would still be procrastinating if it were not for the previous federal government’s pressuring it to get on with the job. In terms of local infrastructure, the Australian government has been funding the crucial completion of the Hogbin Drive extension, working with local government and the state government to construct that vital link in Coffs Harbour’s road network. The Howard government was much more interested in getting things done in the infrastructure field than using it as a political football.

A prime example of Labor’s irresponsibility is the stalled development of broadband infrastructure. The OPEL consortium project has stopped and long delays are already starting to occur in Labor’s proposed national broadband network. The issuing of tenders has been delayed for 12 months—which is a long time in technology terms—although major regional businesses and small businesses alike use the internet as a lifeline. The internet is as important to them as the railways were to businesses in the 19th century.

In conclusion, the member for Grayndler is looking at regional infrastructure from his office in Sydney and delaying funding for local community infrastructure projects, such as the upgrading of the Coffs Harbour Regional Conservatorium with no funds being available until 2009-10. Local communities cannot wait an extra year in limbo for their local infrastructure projects to be upgraded. Community projects need assistance from our federal government. The Coffs Harbour conservatorium needs the assistance of the federal government if it is going to find a permanent home in which it can undertake the teaching of music to young and older people alike in the Coffs Harbour area. I certainly commend the work of the Howard government in the area of infrastructure, and I certainly condemn the delays that this new incoming government is causing to regional communities by abandoning the Regional Partnerships program and the Sustainable Regions program and delaying access to any future regional development funding for the year 2009-10.

Kirsten Livermore (Capricornia, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a pleasure to speak on this motion. I commend the member for Oxley for bringing it before the House. It is great to be speaking on it at a time when this Labor government is committed to playing its part in building and investing in the infrastructure of our country—the infrastructure our regions need in order to prosper. In preparing for this motion I was hard-pressed to think about what I would have spoken about a year ago. Over the past 10 years I have given a lot of speeches in this House about infrastructure, but in the past they have usually been about what was not being done in the area of infrastructure provision and the problems that was causing. There was nothing you could really talk about under the previous government’s term when it came to the points in this motion, such as infrastructure planning to provide the platform for regional economic growth, an agenda of creating a stronger and more participatory regional development structure through the establishment of Infrastructure Australia and Regional Development Australia and a commitment to regional development and the delivery of regionally significant infrastructure. They are all points in this motion and they are all points about which we now thankfully have something to say, because this government has made infrastructure planning and investment a priority.

In fact, one of the first pieces of legislation brought into the new parliament this year was the Infrastructure Australia Act, which came into effect on 9 April. Infrastructure Australia will develop a strategic blueprint for Australia’s future infrastructure needs. In partnership—and partnership was something else you did not hear much about under the previous government—with the states, territories, local government and the private sector it will facilitate its implementation. Infrastructure Australia will also provide advice to Australian governments about infrastructure gaps and bottlenecks that hinder economic growth and prosperity. It will identify investment priorities and policy and regulatory reforms that will be necessary to enable timely and coordinated delivery of national infrastructure investment. That is something that this country has been crying out for. For too long the former government cherry-picked projects for their political value and blamed the states for everything else. When it comes to infrastructure, we need clear, strategic priorities that will grow this nation, not pork-barrelling to grow someone’s margin. That is the planning side of things, but there is also the investment side that is important to get things moving.

Not long after Infrastructure Australia was established in April this year the Labor government showed in the budget that we are serious about investing in infrastructure as well. We need to get moving on some of these bottlenecks that have been holding back our productivity and contributing to inflationary pressures. The Labor government announced in the budget the Building Australia Fund, an initial $20 billion from the budget surpluses expected this year and in 2008-09. This is money that, in the years to come, will be used to build critical economic infrastructure such as roads, rail, ports and, of course—we cannot forget—broadband. We have to get moving on this task of building our national infrastructure after years of neglect, infrastructure that will underpin growth in regions like the one I represent, allow us to make the most of our opportunities and ultimately set Australia up for a strong future.

In the time I have left I want to report on two infrastructure priorities in my electorate that I am pleased to say are receiving some much-needed attention as a result of this government’s commitment to getting on with the job of fixing our overstretched infrastructure. As members here would know, my electorate of Capricornia in Central Queensland is at the heart of the coal mining boom. The increase in people and heavy vehicles using the roads around Mackay, in particular, has tested the capacity of both the Bruce Highway and the Peak Downs Highway. As part of the $2.2 billion promised by Labor out of AusLink 2, there will be major improvements to the stretch of Bruce Highway in my electorate running between Childers and Sarina. This includes money for fixing black spots, for providing overtaking lanes and for strengthening and widening the highway.

In good news for the people at the northern end of the electorate of Capricornia, work is already underway on one of Labor’s election promises, the duplication of the highway from Bakers Creek to the city gates in Mackay. The other notorious road in my electorate is the Peak Downs highway linking Mackay with the mines and towns of the Bowen Basin. The spot where the highway crosses the Eton Range has claimed more lives than anyone cares to remember and needs serious improvement to become a safe and efficient road. I am pleased to say that the Prime Minister has committed to partnering with the state government. We are putting in $1 million to investigate a realignment of the highway over that dangerous Eton Range crossing. (Time expired)

Judi Moylan (Pearce, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to have the opportunity to speak on this motion and my thanks go particularly to the member for Oxley for bringing it to the chamber. In his motion he makes some very good points in that infrastructure planning provides a platform for regional economic growth and jobs. He is also right in saying that the rapid growth in many regional centres has placed significant pressure on the nation’s infrastructure. That is certainly the case in my electorate of Pearce.

I have long advocated the need for greater investment in infrastructure, particularly in the regional and rural areas, but to claim the past 12 years have been a missed opportunity to invest in the future infrastructure of Australia is just plain wrong. Firstly, AusLink was established by the former coalition government in 2004 and represents the most significant change since Federation in the way the Commonwealth tackles national transport. Thanks to AusLink, the Commonwealth and the states are now able to develop long-term strategies for key major transport corridors, rating projects according to merit and giving ample lead time to the private sector. Through COAG, the states and territories were asked to prepare an infrastructure report every five years. This makes a lot of sense, and here we are today discussing whether a further $20 million of Commonwealth money should be spent over the next four years with the introduction of Infrastructure Australia.

This leads us back to a key issue here, which is effectively an issue of governance: the objective and sensible management of Infrastructure Australia. It seems as though Infrastructure Australia may well be a duplication of the states’ efforts and responsibilities. If so, should the federal government be in a position to be bailing out the states? I don’t think so. Nor should it be allowed to use Infrastructure Australia as a slush fund. It is important to make it clear that the coalition supports infrastructure development and has done so over a long period of time. It does not, however, support the government having complete control over a body that is entrusted with handling the future of this country’s infrastructure requirements. Any entity handling infrastructure in Australia should be independent of government to provide objective and balanced views on what this nation needs going forward. Perhaps such a body could take the time to investigate the Labor government’s election promises, but I digress.

The government cannot and should not protect the states from their own incompetence. Within my own electorate of Pearce I have witnessed first hand the former state government’s inability to act. For example, the Commonwealth government committed $98.1 million to upgrade the Great Northern Highway between Muchea and Wubin more than four years ago. So far only $41.9 million has been spent on the road and it is far from finished. Angry members of the Bindoon safe roads committee are entitled to know where that money has gone and they have not to date received any answers. As the Bindoon safe roads committee chairman, Ian Watson, said, this highway is the lifeline to the state’s north-west and services many road trains, trucks, tourist caravans and wide loads under escort. I remind the chamber that we contribute something in the order of $50 billion to the national wealth out of mining alone in WA and these roads are absolutely critical to that continuing. Main Roads in WA promised everything but it is impossible for them to deliver when they do not know where the money has gone to and they do not have it available to do their job. Here we have a situation where the coalition government was investing in the future of infrastructure in the Pearce electorate but the state Labor government’s ineptitude has left many residents without services and very disillusioned. It is a very dangerous situation. That disillusion has been well and truly evident in last weekend’s poll with the disastrous election result for Labor. So I think that speaks volumes.

The concept of an independent body that assesses these issues in an unbiased fashion has merit, but the idea of the federal Labor government running such an entity, intent on protecting its state Labor colleagues, has no place at all. The regions in Pearce, long starved of funds for infrastructure development, would welcome an independent assessment by government of future growth predictions. They would also like a fair allocation of infrastructure funding from the government without political interference, particularly for new rail lines for the carting of wheat—which is absolutely essential now that we have changed the marketing arrangements for wheat—and for upgrades to major highways.(Time expired).

Sharon Grierson (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I congratulate the member for Oxley for bringing this important motion before the House, a motion that notes that ‘infrastructure planning provides the platform for regional economic growth’. My electorate of Newcastle is a great engine of economic growth in New South Wales and a significant driver for the national economy. The trade value of all exports out of the port of Newcastle, the largest coal-exporting port in the world, in the 2007-08 year was $10.3 billion—a $2 billion increase on the previous year. Newcastle’s regional airport, the fastest growing regional airport in Australia, contributed half a billion dollars into the regional economy, with $150 million specifically into tourism, according to the latest data. Almost one in every 10 jobs in the Newcastle-Hunter region is involved in manufacturing, another major source of our regional exports. But we can achieve more. It is strategic infrastructure planning and delivery of freight and passenger links that will keep the people and goods moving efficiently around our region, our nation and the world, maximising the potential of our region by linking our roads, rail, ports and airports and providing the platform for economic growth.

Earlier this year I hosted Newcastle’s 2020 summit in conjunction with the University of Newcastle. Under the leadership of co-chairs Karen Howard and Graham Sargent, the infrastructure group agreed that our region needs to speak with one coordinated voice when it comes to infrastructure priorities and planning. As a result, I met with the co-chairs and other stakeholders last week to discuss the private submission that will go through to Infrastructure Australia. We discussed the nation-building infrastructure priorities for our region: maximising the coal chain; maximising freight links to regional, national and international routes; maximising the connectivity and movement of people within our region, through our region and out of our region; taking steps that will lead to the formation of a new and modern east coast freight centre that meets the expanding needs of the Newcastle, Hunter and Central Coast communities, takes pressure off Sydney and assists our trade exposed industries to better find emission efficiencies in a Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme world; securing efficient, reliable energy to the region; and maximising IT connectivity to support all sectors of our economy—particularly our research institutes and the numerous small and medium enterprises now reliant upon high-speed broadband.

I make particular mention of the importance of taking steps towards creating a new entry and exit point for the state of New South Wales. If we are going to cope both with infrastructure bottlenecks in Sydney and with the growth of my region, then making freight and trade routes more efficient makes good economic sense. Newcastle is well placed to be a major additional freight and logistic hub for the state of New South Wales.

I take this opportunity to congratulate the Australian Rail Track Corporation, ARTC, for their infrastructure work in the Hunter Valley and thank them for the update and briefing that they gave to me last week. There is much work to be done in our region, but I congratulate the Hunter Business Chamber and the Hunter Economic Development Corporation for their leadership in infrastructure planning and look forward to tabling their private submission, when completed, in the House in the near future.

The motion before us also notes that ‘the changing social and demographic environment in major regional centres presents significant economic and development challenges’. This has been particularly evident in the city of Newcastle casting off its industrial image and moving towards a new modern vibrancy. This transformation was greatly assisted by the previous federal Labor government’s Building Better Cities program, but sadly the Howard government that followed was more interested in regional rorts and pork-barrelling than in investing in securing the long-term prosperity of regional Australia.

The motion notes also that ‘the rapid growth in many regional centres has placed the nation’s infrastructure network under significant pressure’. This is very true of my region. Population growth between the census of 2001 and that of 2006 was four per cent or more in the Newcastle, Paterson, Hunter and Charlton electorates. However, booming areas like Thornton in my electorate have not been well served by transport or communications infrastructure. The infrastructure lag is dramatic, inconvenient, discouraging and definitely loss-creating. The last 12 years under the federal coalition government have been ones of missed opportunity for the nation to invest in the future beyond the mining boom, particularly into our regions.

The motion supports the government’s agenda of creating a stronger and more participatory regional development structure through the establishment of Infrastructure Australia, Regional Development Australia and the Major Cities Unit. Newcastle is included in the Major Cities project. I look forward to an upcoming meeting with Minister Albanese to acquaint him with the General Property Trust proposal for revitalising the almost dormant retail heart of my city, Newcastle. I support the government’s commitment to regional development and the delivery of regionally significant infrastructure, and I commend this motion to the House.

Stuart Robert (Fadden, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to support the intent of the first part of the motion but, frankly, I laughed myself a little silly at the second half. With respect to the first half, I agree: infrastructure planning does provide the platform for regional economic growth. The rapid growth in many regional centres has placed the nation’s infrastructure network under pressure. The changing social and demographic environment in major regional centres certainly presents a significant economic and development challenge. I agree wholeheartedly that the past 12 years have been a missed opportunity for the nation to invest in the future beyond the current mining boom. I can only assume from the motion that, when referring to the past 12 years, considering that the coalition government was in power for 11½ years, they are simply referring to the states.

In reference to the missed opportunity by the Labor states over the last 12 years, I can only say ‘hear, hear’ to the Labor Party for recognising what the nation knows: the Labor states have failed the nation. The states’ record is abominable. Since the GST was implemented, the states have received $46 billion more than they would have done if the wholesale sales tax structure had still been in place. Out of this $46 billion windfall—because if we had stayed with the wholesale tax regime the extra $46 billion would not have been there—how much have the Labor states spent on infrastructure? Is it 10 per cent, 20 per cent or 50 per cent? If infrastructure planning provides a platform for economic growth, if growth is so important, out of this $46 billion you would expect the Labor state governments to have expended a substantial amount. They have spent $2 billion. That is it—a lousy $2 billion. Out of $46 billion in unanticipated income, they have spent $2 billion.

Let us look at the moribund state of New South Wales. Frankly, any Labor member for New South Wales should be embarrassed at the state that New South Wales Labor has fallen into. Over that period of time, the pay of state public servants has increased 14 per cent above the business sector. The Labor state governments across the nation will have taken debt—as in public debt—from something like $10 billion in 2005 to over $80 billion by 2010 as they rapidly seek to catch up on the infrastructure quandaries that their 12 years of neglect have caused.

The Henry Ergas review also reinforces that only $2 billion out of the windfall $46 has been spent. What did our Prime Minister say on 30 June 1999 about that GST windfall of $46 billion? Frankly, it is a little laughable. He said:

When the history of this parliament, this nation and this century is written, 30 June 1999 will be recorded as a day of fundamental injustice—an injustice which is real, an injustice which is not simply conjured up by the fleeting rhetoric of politicians. It will be recorded as the day when the social compact that has governed this nation for the last 100 years was torn up. It will be recorded as the day when the nation’s taxation system moved from progressivity to regressivity. It will be recorded as the day when the parliament of the country said to the poor of the country that they could all go and take a running jump.

Well, thank you, Prime Minister Rudd, for your incredible insights in 1999, because the GST delivered $46 billion to Labor states and what did they do with it? At a time of record need for infrastructure, what did these abominable Labor state governments do? They spent $44 billion on pay rises for public servants and a whole range of other anomalies and $2 billion on infrastructure.

The Labor government has the hide to walk into the House with a motion decrying the lack of infrastructure that has been put in place, decrying the previous coalition government for it but secretly knowing that it is their own Labor states and talking up the Labor fest. This government has put in place a whole range of Labor slush funds on the back of the surpluses provided by the member for Higgins.

This Labor government should look very carefully at what the Howard government left: $38 billion for AusLink, which includes Roads to Recovery and $2.4 billion in interstate rail networks; $4.1 billion for broadband, and $2 billion for the Communications Fund. What the previous government left goes on. Do not try and cover up the abominable and moribund behaviour of state Labor governments through your revisionism. It is not worthy of you, nor of me.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting. The honourable member will have leave to continue speaking when the debate is resumed.