James Bidgood (Dawson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question—

Tony Smith (Casey, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Anthony Smith interjecting

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Casey is warned!

James Bidgood (Dawson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry. What is the government doing to prepare farmers and their communities for the future, and what challenges does the government face in achieving that?

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Dawson for his question. A number of challenges are faced by farmers, including adapting to climate change, dealing with exports and dealing with the challenges for infrastructure—

John Cobb (Calare, National Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, you’re not helping them deal with exports!

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Wait till you hear what your leader said. Just wait!

John Cobb (Calare, National Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr John Cobb interjecting

Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Calare will stop interjecting. The minister will ignore the interjections.

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I hold the portfolio of fisheries as well, and he takes to the bait! On the issue of climate change, described by the National Farmers Federation as perhaps the biggest challenge facing agriculture in Australia, the government has provided a clear pathway through on Australia’s farming future, making sure that, through research and development, farmers are being given a way of interacting and being part of the process in reducing emissions, while still improving their own productivity. At the same time, from those opposite we face the challenge of working out ‘Is there bipartisan support or is there not?’ as we go through each of these measures. We have calls opposite, from the member for Goldstein and the Leader of the Opposition, for tougher action. We have calls for weaker action—from the member from Goldstein and the Leader of the Opposition. We also have calls from the shadow minister for agriculture for no action at all being taken in Australia, and we have calls from the member for Tangney for action instead to be taken in outer space.

They have arrived at a target. Their target is both higher than ours and lower than ours. The answer to how they could arrive at that is quite simple: those opposite have a target that is not a number but a person sitting at the table opposite us. That is the one target that those behind him can agree on.

The hypocrisy, though, does not only go to dealing with climate change. We have it as well on questions that were even asked yesterday, on export subsidies. The shadow minister for agriculture just said on exports: ‘Look at what you’re doing with the subsidies.’ Think of a previous minister for agriculture, who now leads the National Party, who, in a statement, said these words:

We give a high priority to eliminating domestic and export subsidies, which continue to distort world markets.

He called for the elimination of those very subsidies when he held the same portfolio. That is the Leader of the Nationals.

At the same time, we have the infrastructure issues and the calls that have been made for so long by those opposite. The Leader of the Nationals calls for more money for country schools, and then votes against it. The shadow minister for agriculture calls for more money for farmers, and then votes against it. We have calls for more money for roads, and then they vote against it. The member for Hinkler, who was being very sincere, I think, in his calls for doing something about level crossings, was then compelled, as a member of the coalition, to vote against that money coming through for level crossings.

Only this morning, Senator Joyce said, ‘When he refers to spending, he refers to ridiculous issues such as ceiling insulation, boom gates and sundry payments to sundry people.’ Boom gates? What are the boom gates he is referring to if that is not an objection to doing something about level crossings? You can go through the list, electorate by electorate, of the level crossings that have been given boom gates in the state of Queensland for those opposite, including in the electorates of Herbert, Maranoa, Wide Bay and Kennedy. You can go through the country and you can see the popular level crossings that finally something is being done about, only to be consistently opposed by those opposite.

A year ago those opposite were backgrounding against their then leader, claiming that he did not stand for anything. So their new strategy is to stand for everything, no matter how contradictory: take tougher action on climate change, take no action, take action in outer space; yesterday, they were complaining about us keeping their deadline on export subsidies but, in government, they called to eliminate them; they demanded support for country schools, roads and farmers but then vote against those same measures. They are out of ideas, out of touch, out of control.