Ken Wyatt (Hasluck, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to talk on Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2010-2011 and cognate bill. I want to cover some key aspects that go to the appropriation process for the seat of Hasluck. Over a period of time I have not seen some significant developments that have needed to occur with respect to both infrastructure and the level of funding to organisations within my electorate.

I first want to turn to two election commitments given by the Prime Minister when she was campaigning in Western Australia. The first commitment was $450,000 for the Str8 Talk’n program in Thornlie and Langford. This is a program developed and managed by the City of Gosnells. The underpinning ethos of the program is for a youth forum that tackles and discusses issues that are very particular to the youth in that area. There is also a focus on reducing crime through the active participation of young people in determining some of the key issues that are of importance to them and using that forum to influence the way in which the City of Gosnells provides programs and services and considers the needs of young people. The program also has the capacity to reach into other youth forums. It would be a pity to see such a constructive model of engagement for young people diminished by a lack of funding.

The second commitment was $1.2 million for a road link between Kalamunda Road and the proposed Elmore Way in High Wycombe. It is essential work that is enabling traffic flow within High Wycombe between Kalamunda Road and the streets surrounding that shopping centre. It is important for the growth of that suburb, and it was a funding commitment that we on this side also matched during the election campaign. The shire of Kalamunda are undertaking the work but they are basing their planning around the fact that the appropriation and the handing down of the budget will see that commitment being honoured. In addition to that, there are a number of other key elements within Hasluck that have not been considered, although they are extremely important.

I now turn to the Kalamunda Districts Rugby Union Club. The club had a long involvement with the two previous members for Hasluck. They have developed a strategy for an eastern zone for the development of rugby union that engages young people and families. I was astounded to go down to their oval and see 200 young children playing and training for their rugby union games. The expansion takes in an area from Midland through to Armadale. What they want to do is to upgrade both the grounds and the facilities to enable the growth of the sport based around the families in the area. It covers the flat area—what they call the foothills region—and the team is very effective in winning finals within the competition. They have also included women in their rugby club. The women participate in both netball and rugby union. The facilities they have were developed and built out of their own funds. Their fundraising was then matched not only by the shire of Kalamunda but also by a major mining company, who also sponsored some of the work. They have a shortfall of about $1.8 million for their expansion. The expansion of that club will give some strength to the families involved right throughout Hasluck.

Another initiative that funding was sought for was the Machinery Preservation Club. It is based on the old Midland Railway Workshops, where men who trained and worked there for a period of time have come back together to restore old machines and bring them back to working condition. In the process, they teach skills that have been lost. They have a vision to have a stand-alone purpose-built facility in which they can continue to restore machinery that is part of the heritage of Western Australia. They have an engine from HMAS Sydney that was left on the wharf at Fremantle. They have restored that and they have got it back into working condition. They take the machines that they have repaired to local shows so that children can see the types of machines that were once part of the standard stock of equipment and vehicles that operated within WA over the last five or six decades. They have to move out of the location where they are, so they are seeking government support to enable them to continue the valuable work that they do.

The key initiative that requires significant funding is the Perth to Darwin highway. The mining sector to the north of Perth relies very heavily on the existing roads, and the amount of heavy equipment that is taken from Perth out of Forrestfield and out of Kewdale either comes in by ship or is freighted to Western Australia, assembled and then taken north. Among the equipment they take are the dumpsters that are used in the mining sites. When they move them it requires a considerable amount of the road. At the moment, if you are coming down through the Swan Valley, you are often held up because of the size of the dumpsters on the back of the trucks.

It is proposed that the road from Midland through to Muchea be widened to become a new highway that will take the new dumpsters to be imported into Western Australia, which are much bigger and wider than the current dumpsters. The new ones require the total width of a road, which will impede and inhibit the flow of traffic. It is a $480 million infrastructure need but it will be significant because it is the roadway that supports the mining sector of Western Australia, which, more importantly, is a sector that adds to the coffers of the Commonwealth from the taxes that it pays. If the Leader of the Australian Greens, Mr Bob Brown, is successful in the Senate in leveraging, in the manner that he is, Labor Party support for the mining tax then certainly I would expect to see funding allocated to that highway.

Another one is the Lloyd Street underpass, a road that will connect the Midland town site and the regions to the east of Midland to the new Midland campus hospital. At the moment there are boom gates there. The proposal of the City of Swan is to sink that road to enable, in particular, emergency vehicles to get through without being delayed by trains, which are quite long. All the freight that comes by rail passes through Midland, and the length of the trains, in an emergency situation, could delay an ambulance. The proposal has been on the drawing board for some time, and I know that representatives of the city have visited Canberra a number of times to lobby for funding to complete the underpass, which will both enable a smoother flow of traffic under the rail line and, more importantly, prevent delays to people requiring emergency services at the new Midland Health Campus.

Another significant infrastructure need in the seat of Hasluck is the Hazelmere rail realignment. If you live in the suburb of Guildford, which is on the edge of Midland, you know there is a significant curve in the rail line to enable the train to come through Midland and then branch out to Forrestfield-Kewdale. The impact of metal wheels on rail because of the tightness of the curve creates an irritating high-pitched noise. Also, if there were a derailment, it is likely that there would be spillage of chemicals into the Helena River, eventually flowing into the Swan River. So there are environmental factors that have to be considered. There are proposals in the long term to realign the line out of Midland and through Hazelmere, which would take it through an industrial area, into both Kewdale and Forrestfield, thereby reducing the danger of chemical spillage, which would be detrimental to people’s health and the environment.

The final thing I want to mention is the Italian club in my electorate. Over the last 32 years the Italian community have been progressively building a facility in which to come together. They are from the Abruzzo region in Italy. They decided they would purchase land and build a facility that would allow the continuation of their culture among the younger people. Over a period they have contributed to the building of the facility but it is still very much incomplete. On two occasions they sought funding for the club through the previous member for Hasluck.

When it is completed they will have a facility that will enable to the community in proximity to hire the facility to use it. They want to build a soccer ground that would give younger people in the area a recreational area in which they can play. They want it to be a social hub for the older Italians who are now starting to slow down through age. Historically, they contributed to the timber industry of Western Australia, to the southwest of Pemberton, and to the agricultural industry that was established post World War Two. Each of these people came out alone and eventually brought their families with them. To me it seems a travesty that we have not supported an initiative like this given the contribution that they have made to the economy of Western Australia and, more importantly, to the economy of Australia.

It has been interesting being elected to the seat of Hasluck because it is a diverse region. Its infrastructure needs are significant and those needs have not been met through subsequent budgets. I would hope to see, at a minimum, the two election commitments that were made included within the appropriation bills when the budget is delivered. Plans also need to be included for some significant infrastructure work around the top end of Midlands for the rail realignment because it is particularly important to the Western Australian economy and ultimately for our capacity as a country to be competitive in the industries associated with mining.

The work that is sometimes done offshore can be done within Western Australia to enable businesses around the Kewdale, Forestfield and Kenwick-Gosnells area to expand and provide the support that the mining and petroleum sectors will need. Those industries will build the capacities of young Australians and provide the pool of workers needed not only in Western Australia but across this nation as mining and resource initiatives continue to expand.

I am very keen to see that we give serious consideration to that end. As I said in my maiden speech, one of the things that I like about our democracy is that the ministers are ministers for all Australians, regardless of which party they belong to. Their work needs to encompass the enhanced opportunities that come from industries associated within these types of infrastructure. I certainly promote the concept that we have to build Australian industries to strengthen them and enable them to be competitive and grow within any economic climate. If we do not we will stifle the opportunities for the young people who come long after us. They will need to work in competitive industries that are supported by the type of infrastructure that is conducive to quality social and economic life.

Ewen Jones (Herbert, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2010-2011 and highlight some of the needs in my seat of Herbert, which includes the City of Townsville, Magnetic Island and the community of Palm Island. I have spoken a number of times about the need for North Queensland to have a PET-CT scanner. I have spoken about this in my maiden speech and in other speeches in this House, and I will continue to speak on this issue until we get one. A PET scanner is a positron emissions tomographer. It is the best technology we have to detect tumours and cancerous growths in people.

Currently, to get a PET scan after a doctor has said they need to get a photograph of what is inside, a person has to go to Brisbane to have that scan done. It is bad enough when a doctor says to you, ‘I think we need to get something done here’ but it is even worse to get sent down while you are undergoing radiation treatment. Quite often as soon as you have had your radiation treatment you must go back down to have another PET scan. It is an 1¾ hour flight to Brisbane and you must stay at least overnight while you are having it done.

A lot of these times people who have had radiation treatment are barely conscious. Their immune system is very weak. They are sick. They must travel with someone else. So the costs are huge. Currently, we have between 500 and 700 people from North Queensland travelling to Brisbane each year to have PET scans done. The cost of a PET scanner is around $9 million. There are plans to bring a PET scanner to the Townsville General Hospital for the new radiology section, with the upgrade of the hospital, but that is by the end of 2012. The coalition, coming up to the election, gave the promise of a PET scanner in a public-private partnership with Queensland X-ray to install a PET scanner at the Wesley Hospital in Hermit Park. That building is already built; all they need is the go-ahead from government and the PET scanner will be there within six months. So the PET scans needed in North Queensland would be there today—the building is already there; it is ready to go—and the cost to government would have been $2.5 million. Given that a PET scanner is essentially an outpatient service, there is no need to have it at the hospital. Yes, they do want them at the hospital—it is about the government wanting to centralise absolutely everything so they can control it. The other thing with doing it with a public-private partnership is that Queensland X-ray would be able to do up to 15 scans per day, whereas, at the Townsville General Hospital and the Royal Brisbane Hospital, they comply with a maximum of three scans per day. So it just makes sense—it is a saving to government of over $6½ million and it would be operating today.

Secondly, I would like to raise the issue of public health. We have had bad weather in North Queensland recently. We are in the clean-up phase after Cyclone Yasi. But what we have to do now, as well as clean up, is deal with diseases like dengue fever and melioidosis. We should not have to. During the campaign the coalition promised $40 million to establish the Australian Institute of Tropical Health and Medicine at James Cook University campuses in Townsville and in Cairns. James Cook University is the most significant tropical university in the world. There was to be $40 million to secure the facility. To do it properly we need $120 million. I do not think we should ever lose sight of how much we actually need to get this thing up and running. The people who live in the tropical belts of the world have a higher infant mortality and a lower life expectancy than those who live in temperate zones.

Townsville is closer to Port Moresby than it is to Brisbane. That is a fact: the nearest capital city to Townsville is in another country. That is how big the northern part of Australia is. So, when there is a cholera outbreak in Papua New Guinea, it simply should not happen—we should be able to mobilise and do things. Australia’s first people, our Aboriginal people, were the most susceptible to the H1N1 virus, or swine flu virus. We should be making sure that those things are tackled at a tropical level. If we are to turn the western plains of North Queensland into Australia’s food bowl into the future we need to make sure that the diseases which are endemic in the ground are taken care of and that we have a plan to combat them. The Australian Institute of Tropical Health and Medicine must be established. Even today the Thursday Island hospital has cases of drug resistant malaria and Japanese encephalitis—in the hospital now. We must be prepared for that as the movement of people from Papua New Guinea, across the Torres Strait into northern Australia becomes more and more prevalent. People put pigs, birds and other animals into their boats, and away they come—because they are very close.

Thirdly, I would like to talk about the Magnetic Island walkway. This was promised by both sides of the parliament, both major parties, in the lead-up to the election, but it would appear that the government has walked away from another election promise—a cost of $4.5 million only, to take a walkway around the front of the hills from Nelly Bay all the way around to Arcadia. This would be one of the great walks in the world. It would also link into the World Heritage forest walks and bush walks over the hills. Currently, to get across to Arcadia you must go over the hill. The verges are very narrow; it is a dangerous road. I actually tried to get the walkway put up through ‘black spot’ legislation, but not enough people have been killed. Magnetic Island is a great place for backpackers and lots of backpackers go there. They will try to save money wherever possible, so they will walk there. It is a pleasant walk—if you do not get run over. Recently we had a series of bus strikes on Magnetic Island which forced backpackers with large suitcases and big backpacks to walk over this hill. The edge of the road is the drop-off zone of the cliff. There will be someone killed there one day, and let us just hope it is not because of this. It will be one of the great walks and, at a cost of $4.5 million, I just do not see why we cannot do it and why the government has walked away.

Again, both sides of this House came to the party with the convention centre in Townsville, at a cost of $47.67 million, and both sides are holding true to their promise. I thank the government for that. I think the government does need some credit for this because it is visionary to have a convention centre in Townsville. But I would ask that not only do we promise the $47.67 million but we get $2 million straight away to the Townsville City Council to come up with concept drawings and design, and get the formation of the whole plan together.

A net economic benefit of $100 million per year is projected to come out of this convention centre, and that is not taking into account the added development which will go with this. Townsville does not have the tourism market that other places do. Our visitors are mainly there for business. What we do with our tourism is to get people there—say, for a convention—and then find we are a nice bunch of people to spend time with and it is a great place for families. We have people crying out to come to a convention space, because our entertainment centre is basically a glorified basketball court and can hold fully-blown break-out areas for a full convention facility of only 150 to 200 people. So we need a proper convention centre in our city. The one bone of contention I would like to note is that the state government is yet to commit to the convention centre, even though they stood there on their digs and said that, if the Townsville City Council did not pony up for Berth 10, the ocean terminal, the state government would not be helping out with the convention centre. I now call on the state government to help out with that as well.

Blakeys Crossing used to be the Bruce Highway. It used to be the main road into North Queensland, into Townsville from Ingham. But it goes under in a sunshower, and has done since I have been in Townsville, which is 17 years, and had gone under in a sunshower for years before that. It is an absolute disgrace that that was the Bruce Highway, the major highway in and out of Townsville. We now have Woolcock Street. That meant that the stretch of Ingham Road which is commonly called Blakeys Crossing was gifted back to the Townsville City Council. So what used to be a federal road is now a local road taking pressure off a state road. This is an important link between the industrial suburbs of Garbutt and the Bohle. When I first got to Townsville, the Bohle was the end of the world; you would not go there for a holiday. It is now a massive industrial park. The state government has brought in over $100 million in land tax alone, and yet Blakeys Crossing continues to be a road which goes under every year, and does so more and more. We have had a terrible year with it this year. And what happens when Blakeys Crossing goes under is that you have to use Mather Street, and that clogs the Mather Street roundabout. It becomes almost impassable. There is a level crossing for trains, ungated, on Mather Street, and sooner or later someone is going to get run over there through being stuck in traffic. If Blakeys Crossing goes under, that is the only way, from the Bohle, to get to the airport or the hospital without having to go back out of town and all the way around on the ring-road. It is obscene that we have to do this. There is talk of a flyover at the Mather Street roundabout, but that will only shift the problem from the Mather Street roundabout to the Duckworth Street roundabout, and then to the Pilkington Street roundabout. At a cost of $26 million to fix Blakeys Crossing and make it weatherproof—flood-proof—for the whole year will save governments of all persuasions at all levels over $70 million by not having to do flyovers at other roundabouts. It is simple, it makes sense and we should have to do it.

It went under this weekend, and I was receiving phone calls while I was in Canberra from people all over Townsville, complaining about it. I have launched a petition, which I will be tabling in the House, to get this brought along. I am not throwing slings and arrows at the government here, because they did not make the promise coming into the election. We made the promise at the election but we are not in government. The government should look at this as part of its overall flood mitigation strategy.

The final point I would like to talk about is Palm Island. Housing on Palm Island is an absolute disgrace and has been for an awfully long time. We have a situation at the moment where QBuild, the state government builders of property, are erecting buildings on Palm Island not much bigger than a garden shed and at a cost of over $300,000. In many cases, the floor of the dwelling is below the sewerage line. To anyone’s imagining, you cannot do that. You cannot flush the toilet and expect it to go uphill.

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What’s their excuse?

Ewen Jones (Herbert, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They do not have one. What they want to do is put in a pump. But we know that the pump is only ever going to fail on Good Friday or Christmas Eve. That is the only time that pumps like that fail. The Palm Island Council has repeatedly asked them to come in and raise the levels of these buildings but they will not do it, so these houses are empty. The other problem with the housing is that there is no local employment or engagement at any level. There are registered builders on Palm Island, there are registered plumbers and electricians and labourers.

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Slipper interjecting

Sid Sidebottom (Braddon, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Remarks will be through the chair.

Ewen Jones (Herbert, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What we have to do is get these things done. We have a program which will design housing for Palm Island which will be hardy, cyclone proof and at a fraction of the cost. I have a plan in at Palm Island Council at the moment to do a test case on one of these houses. It will see no outside labour come in; it will be a totally local build, totally local engagement, and a product that the people on Palm Island will want.

In 2007 we had a plan for 46 houses to be built in a subdivision on Palm Island. None of those houses have been built, not one. Over $700 million is sitting there, waiting to go into Indigenous housing, and nothing can be built on Palm Island. It is an absolute disgrace and it must be known. The government is just sitting on its hands, going from committee to committee, and it just does not happen. It should happen. We have a plan to make it happen with 46 houses. The next census this year will show a marked increase in the population of Palm Island. We have to look after this thing. We have up to 20 people living in these houses all over the place.

We have a situation on Palm Island where education is just going out the window. There are more problems in a square foot of Palm Island than there are in every other Indigenous community in Australia. It is a tough place, but it is one of the most beautiful places in the world. The people there have the mood for change; the people there are trying to change. The government should make every effort to facilitate that change and bring them on board. Those are my thoughts on this issue. We always have defence needs, health needs and all that sort of thing in Townsville, but those are the key areas that I believe should be addressed.

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This debate on Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2010-2011 and Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2010-2011 is one of those golden opportunities that honourable members have to talk about issues of importance to their electorates. Today I want to raise the issue of the Asian honeybee. Members would have seen bee producers demonstrating in a very civilised and orderly way outside Parliament House to highlight the importance of the need to eradicate the Asian honeybee, which does threaten the honey industry in Australia.

The presence of the bee was discerned some five years ago. It is believed that the bees arrived in the hollow mast of ship and were first found and identified in 2005, while the ship was docked and undergoing repairs in Cairns in tropical North Queensland. Another hive of the bees was found two years later, in 2007, in a drum not far away from the first location. Asian bees are highly dominant, and the fear is that they will take over the habitats of local native bees and cause great damage to local bee populations. Asian bees also carry disease. They are a hardy intruder and attempts to eradicate them in other countries have not been successful.

The beekeeping industry in Australia believes it can eradicate the problem in this country with the correct support and enough government funding. Beekeepers across Australia, including in my electorate of Fisher—I have been discussing this matter with Dr Max Whitten, a beekeeper—are greatly concerned because this menace has the potential to impact on their industry and affect not only honey production but also the natural and vital pollination of other crops, fruits, vegetables and other plants. Bees are not only about honey; in fact, that is a relatively small part of what they do. They are a key part of the ecological network and play a vital role in the reproduction of plants everywhere. They need to be supported and assisted to ensure their population survives and thrives. Without our bees our agriculture and horticulture industries would be much worse off and probably would risk complete collapse, and much of the pollination of our native plants would not occur.

A government funding program designed to address the issue has come to its end, unfortunately, and apiarists are campaigning for the government to launch a new campaign to continue the fight against this exotic intruder. Beekeepers are visiting Canberra this week to draw attention to the issue and have met with the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry and the honourable member for Calare. I recognise the concerns of those who are dependent on bees and also the difficulties in devising a program that will effectively address the issue of the Asian bee invasion. I ask the government to do all that it can through the Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry to support ongoing attempts to eradicate the Asian bee from Australia.

I now turn to the plight of a cooperative in Maleny in the Sunshine Coast hinterland and the shameful waste of money by the Queensland Labor government’s health department. A small yet thriving store, Maple Street Co-operative on the Sunshine Coast was recently taken to court over the sale of unpasteurised milk allegedly for human consumption. The raw milk was actually being sold as bath milk—known as ‘Cleopatra’s milk’—and was clearly labelled as unsuitable for drinking. After a complaint from a resident, a plainclothes Queensland Health officer entered the store and found that the unpasteurised milk was displayed in the same fridge as their organic pasteurised milk. The sale of unpasteurised, or raw, milk is prohibited under the Food Production (Safety) Act 2000 of Queensland; however, this milk was being sold for cosmetic or bathing purposes only. Queensland Health and Queensland Health’s computer system saw lots of Queensland Health workers either not being paid, being underpaid or being overpaid, and this has gone on for months and months. They have got their priorities wrong in a battle with this locally owned Sunshine Coast cooperative. Due to the investigation, the co-op has decided to no longer stock this product.

After two years, on 22 October 2010 the magistrate in the prosecution launched by Queensland Health announced its decision. Unfortunately, the Maple Street Co-operative was fined $2,500 plus $71.50 for court fees, payable within four months.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is outrageous.

Peter Slipper (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is outrageous, as the Second Deputy Speaker points out. All this could have been avoided. The Maple Street Co-operative has always cooperated with all regulatory bodies and often invited officers to bring their staff up to date on current compliance and regulations. Therefore, had the opportunity been given, they would have been open to discussing the problems relating to unpasteurised milk instead of being dragged to court. The Queensland Health department must have spent tens of thousands of dollars in court appearances. There were 12 Queensland Health officers there to persecute the Maple Street Co-operative. It would have been much more sensible for them not to sell the milk or to put it in a separate fridge. It is disappointing that Queensland Health sought to be so vindictive at a time when they simply were not able to pay their own health workers. Queensland has lots of health problems as a state. The hospital system, of course, needs infusions of money, and we find a situation where Queensland Health is prosecuting in a Nazi-like way a local co-op. That is entirely unacceptable to the local community. It is unacceptable to the health workers who were not being paid. Frankly, it is government gone mad. It is a waste of taxpayers’ dollars It is a criminal misuse of the public money to persecute and prosecute a small local co-op that does such a wonderful job of producing wholesome food and other healthy products for use by the local community.

Frankly, if someone wants to buy Cleopatra’s Bath Milk, or for that matter any sort of raw milk for cosmetic purposes, that should be a matter for the purchaser. If that person chooses to use it in another way then that is a matter, of course, for that person as well. I think it was wrong for Queensland Health to act in the absolutely disgraceful way it did in this situation. I call on the Queensland health minister to resign over this persecution of the local co-op.

Still referring to milk, I would like to draw to the attention of the House the plight of local Sunshine Coast milk producers, who have been disadvantaged by the decision by Coles and Woolworths to cut the price of milk to an unsustainable level, which will make it very difficult for dairy farmers to continue to produce in the long term the wonderful product that is so healthy and good for people to consume. I can understand that consumers are pleased to be able to walk into Coles and Woolworths and buy cheap milk—and, in fact, I understand that, in a country town not far from the Sunshine Coast hinterland, two litres of milk is now being sold for $1.87, as a loss leader as well—but it is unfortunate when producers are disadvantaged.

It will be only a matter of time, despite what Coles and Woolworths are saying, until dairy farmers are asked to subsidise this price war. It is important to recognise that dairy farmers are very important members of our community. They contribute to their local community. It is unfortunate when they are the victims of this kind of pricing, because, ultimately, our health as a community will be much reduced if we do not have a viable dairy industry. My concern is that the artificial price of milk in Coles and Woolworths will in the longer term, despite what Coles and Woolworths say, ultimately push down the price being received by milk producers to an unsustainable level and many milk producers will be unable to remain in that industry and our community as a whole will be poorer for the fact that we will not have local producers producing milk for their communities.

On the Sunshine Coast we have a number of local milk producers and obviously there are many dairy farmers. Ross Hopper and Maleny Dairies do a wonderful job of producing very high-quality milk. People are prepared to pay a good price because of the very high quality that Maleny Dairies produce. So, while I can understand that consumers enjoy being able to buy milk at the prices currently offered by Coles and Woolworths, I have a concern that in the long term dairy farmers will be made to pay the price for this price war. If we are going to lose dairy farmers from the industry, then I do not believe this is an appropriate way to go.

I now turn to the need for major infrastructure on the Sunshine Coast, particularly the need to accelerate the building of the Sunshine Coast University Hospital, which has been delayed by the Queensland Labor government. There is growth in this community. The state Labor government has now taken out of the hands of the Sunshine Coast Council planning authority for the Caloundra South development, which will have more than 40,000 new people, and the Palmview development, which will have something like 16,000 new people. Clearly, if we are going to have this dramatically increased population on the Sunshine Coast, we need vital infrastructure, including the Sunshine Coast University Hospital and an upgrade of the Bruce Highway to six lanes all the way from Caboolture to the Sunshine Coast.

When we were in government we were able to obtain funding from the Howard government to upgrade the Bruce Highway to six lanes from Brisbane to the Sunshine Coast, and that removed the worst bottleneck at the time between Brisbane and the Sunshine Coast. Mr Deputy Speaker Georganas, given that you regularly visit the Sunshine Coast, you would be aware that over the years the volume of traffic on the Bruce Highway has continued to grow and the amount of time it takes to get from the capital city to the Sunshine Coast has become increasingly unacceptable.

We need to make sure that construction of the Sunshine Coast University Hospital is accelerated. Given that many people move from southern parts of Australia to the Sunshine Coast at a stage in their lives when they have increasing health needs, it is important to make sure that the Sunshine Coast University Hospital is built as quickly as possible so that people who do need medical and hospital services are able to access those services on the Sunshine Coast rather than travelling to Brisbane to the large hospitals there. The Nambour Hospital is a wonderful hospital. The Caloundra hospital is very good. But, ultimately, with the growth in our population, the facilities we have are simply not enough to meet the needs of a growing population.

It is important that a medical precinct and a technology precinct be located in the area around where the Sunshine Coast University Hospital is to be constructed. Those precincts will add to the presence of the university hospital as well as creating employment. Employment is one of the major problems we have on the Sunshine Coast. While we have lots of young families in addition to lots of retirees, unfortunately when young people leave school or tertiary education there are not anywhere near enough jobs on the Sunshine Coast. The university hospital, a technology precinct and a medical precinct—all high-tech industries, in much the same way as can be seen in some parts of Taiwan—would greatly advantage the local community and local young people, and would benefit the state of Queensland as a whole.

I think it is really important that the federal government look at supporting the Queensland government with respect to the Sunshine Coast University Hospital. People are sick and tired of the blame game and the buck being passed back and forth. The sooner we have the Sunshine Coast University Hospital constructed, the better our community will be. That will also remove the pressure on people who have to travel from the Sunshine Coast to Brisbane. It will reduce pressure on facilities in Brisbane because people on the Sunshine Coast will be able to be treated locally rather than having to travel to the capital city.

The final point I make is that I would like to see the government accelerate the upgrading of the Bruce Highway from four lanes to six lanes all the way from Caboolture to the Sunshine Coast. I was very concerned when I read that the government intended to cut funding from the Bruce Highway upgrade to enable the government to make part of its contribution towards flood reconstruction. While everyone supports flood reconstruction, it ought not to be at the cost of upgrading the Bruce Highway. If the government were a sound economic manager, it would not need the levy. It would have the money for the restoration after the floods and, also, it would have the money to upgrade the Bruce Highway to six lanes. So I call on the government to urgently upgrade the highway to six lanes from Caboolture to the Sunshine Coast.

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome this opportunity to speak on the Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2010-2011. As part of my address, I call on this Labor government to address the anomalies in the criteria for inner regional and outer regional students applying for youth allowance. It was the Labor Party in the last parliament that changed the rules for access to independent youth allowance and that has had a detrimental effect on students who come from rural areas who have to leave home to gain access to postsecondary education.

This debate is about fairness and equity between city and country and about assisting the regional students to have the same opportunities for postsecondary education as those students who live in capital cities. This government claims to be one for regional Australia. We heard that when the Prime Minister took the office of Prime Minister when she was given the support of the Independents and crossbenchers to form government. She said it would be a government for regional Australia. We are still waiting to hear where the policy direction or shift from the Labor Party is going to be to make it a party supportive of and friendly to regional Australia. But I can assure you, Mr Deputy Speaker, that Labor’s claims have rung hollow thus far since the Prime Minister became Prime Minister.

This Prime Minister and this Labor government have ignored concerns about the financial and emotional burden that their youth allowance criteria are having on the students who live in what is called ‘inner regional’ Australia. It is a concern for those students and it is also a concern for their parents. But the government made a commitment to Independents to bring forward the review. What we would like to see, after 12 months of pressure from the opposition and the private members’ bills that we have passed in the upper house and now in the lower house, is this process being fast-tracked so that the changes that were approved by both houses of parliament come into effect on 1 July this year. The Liberal National Party want to see those changes put in place from 1 July this year.

If Labor do make changes after this review—and a review is what they are talking about; they can accept the umpire’s decision from the two houses of parliament, but we do not need another review—it will be too late. If they conduct a review and start to implement changes as of 1 January next year, it will be too late for the inner regional students who left school in 2009, had a gap year in 2010—last year—and are now still required to work 30 hours a week and defer for up to two years before going on to postsecondary education. Had the coalition’s bill passed by now, they would now be relieved of this unfair criterion. Last year’s school leavers are also left in limbo whilst we wait for the government to act.

The work test used to determine eligibility for youth allowance is just nonsensical for students who live in rural and regional Australia. They would have to leave home to gain access to postsecondary education. This is particularly so in my federal electorate of Maranoa. Under this city-centric Labor government approach, young people in inner regional Australia—areas such as Dalby, Kingaroy and Warwick on the inner Darling Downs in my electorate—are now forced to work 30 hours per week to be eligible for independent youth allowance, whereas those in outer regional Australia, under changes that we were able to achieve in the last parliament, have to work only 15 hours per week, which was the rule for inner and outer regional areas when we were in government. There were not arbitrary lines drawn on maps. The 15-hour rule also applied for those students who lived in our capital cities.

To give you some idea of just how ridiculous these lines on maps are, there is a town called Kaimkillenbun just north of Dalby in my electorate. It is a little village. About 100 people live there. There are 30 students at a wonderful little state school, which a few years ago celebrated its centenary. It is a wonderful school and a wonderful community. It was once serviced by a railway line that came from Dalby out to Kaimkillenbun. When you cross that line now and head up to Cooyar on the way to Kingaroy, on one side of that railway line the criterion is 15 hours per week for access to independent youth allowance; on the other side of the railway line students have to work 30 hours per week. This is just crazy. This is a little community with a local store, hotels, a school, a few houses and a couple of small manufacturing businesses.

It is a classic example. If you are on the wrong side of the tracks in Kaimkillenbun, your children who want to gain access to post-secondary education will be disadvantaged. Many students could have been at the same school, perhaps at high school in Dalby, and caught the bus in and out every day. Because some of them happen to live on one side of the tracks in Kaimkillenbun, they will be subject to the 15-hour work test. On the other side of the tracks, in a community of fewer than 100 people, they will have to work 30 hours per week to gain access to the independent youth allowance. That is how stupid these rules are.

Other towns in my electorate are similarly affected. Millmerran, in the Toowoomba Regional Council area, will be under the 15-hour rule, and that is great. Blackbutt, in the South Burnett region, is also exempt. But Nanango, which is within 15 minutes drive of Blackbutt, is under the 30-hour rule. It is just nonsensical. So students might attend the same high school but, because they happen to live in a different town 15 kilometres away or, in the case of Kaimkillenbun, just on the other side of the railway tracks, they will have a different work test. Under this government’s approach to financial assistance, that is how students from regional and rural Australia gain access to the independent youth allowance.

The other thing that is important is that students who live in rural and regional Australia do not have a choice: they have to leave home to gain access to university or other post-secondary education. They are not privileged like the children who live in our capital cities—and good luck to them all—who also have access to subsidised urban transport to get from their family homes to university. Students in the bush do not have that. They pay full price to get down there on the bus and take up a flat, and the parents have to find the money for the flat so they can live away from home. A town like Dalby is more than 200 kilometres away from Brisbane. Imagine being a student who was living at home there and had to drive to Brisbane daily to gain access to post-secondary education. They would be required to work 30 hours a week, the same as a student living in the city, to gain access to independent youth allowance. In Kingaroy, another town in my electorate, they are in a similar situation.

The recent natural disasters have closed most of those roads, and the Blackbutt Range crossing, on the D’Aguilar Highway between Kingaroy and Brisbane, has been closed for several weeks. It has been progressively reopened, but you can only cross Blackbutt Range on the D’Aguilar Highway on the half-hour. There is a common lane used for coming north-west and for heading to Brisbane, so you can only go on the half-hour. Imagine if students have to travel from Kingaroy to Brisbane to gain access to post-secondary education. It is nonsensical. Recently, I drove from Brisbane to Dalby and it took four hours, just to drive one way. Yet students there have the same work test as students who live in the capital city.

The other great anomaly in this practice of drawing lines on maps is that the cities of Townsville and Cairns are considered ‘outer regional Australia’. They have universities in those cities. They have international airports. We do not have an international airport at Dalby; we do not have a university. We do not have one at Warwick, nor do we have one at Kingaroy. But those students are subject to the 15-hour work test. It is just nonsensical.

We need to encourage students from rural and regional Australia to go on to post-secondary education and take up the professions that we so desperately need in our rural and regional areas, like doctors, veterinarians and pharmacists. Students from rural Australia are the most likely to go back home once they complete their university studies, because they are from the bush, their families are there, they grew up there, they love it. But if they cannot get access to education, to that opportunity to study, that is another loss to rural and regional Australia, because the students in many regional towns—such as Dalby, Warwick and Kingaroy—will now have to work 30 hours a week.

And why would an employer hire someone for 30 hours per week for up to two years so they can gain access to independent youth allowance to become a student? An employer would say, ‘Well, why would we employ them in the first place if we are going to lose them in two years?’ The other situation that is manifesting itself is that, if these young people do start to work 30 hours a week, they might then think, ‘Why would I go on to university? I’ve got a job. I’m enjoying the money.’ They might not only defer; they might not go on to post-secondary education at all. They have a job. They are living at home. They will lose the opportunity of post-secondary education because of this government’s policy, its failure to address the needs of students from rural and regional Australia and these ridiculous, arbitrary lines on maps.

I will now touch on the issue raised by the member for Fisher in relation to the milk-pricing regime of Coles and now Woolworths of selling fresh milk at $1 a litre as a loss leader. This is doing enormous damage not only to the dairy industry potentially down the track but also to small businesses—corner stores and convenience stores. Businesses in my electorate have rung me since Coles started this very aggressive approach to marketing milk at $1 a litre. The corner stores and after-hours stores used to sell 14 or 15 crates of milk a week; they are now selling one or two crates a week and they are also losing sales of other products—Weet-Bix and other grocery items that they would normally sell.

It is not just the milk issue that I find offensive in the actions of Coles and now Woolworths, it is also their unconscionable conduct in relation to a trade practice that is going to impact on small businesses, especially family owned small businesses. It looks like their approach is to use milk, in this case, as a loss leader. It has implications down the track as to how it will affect the dairy industry. I really wonder whether they think of families—family dairy farmers and other people they compete against. Small businesses—those corner stores and convenience stores—are quite happy to compete, but let us do it on a fair and equitable basis.

Milk vendors are coming to me now—the people who sell to restaurants and coffee shops. They have small businesses and they have families. What is happening to their businesses? The coffee shops say, ‘It’s cheaper to go across the road to Coles and buy milk for $1 a litre than to buy it from you, a milk vendor.’ These are other small businesses that are affected by the actions of Coles.

I call on this government to take this issue up with the ACCC. There is going to be a Senate inquiry into it, but I do not believe we can wait that long. We want the senior people from Coles and Woolworths to come when that Senate inquiry is being conducted, but I also believe we should get the ACCC, if it has any teeth at all, to urgently look at this matter and start its process. I find the trade practices being used to bring increased traffic through the doors of the giant supermarkets unconscionable. Whilst they may do a great job, they are also going to destroy in time the livelihoods of many small dairy farmers everywhere.

Dairy farms are usually family owned. The farmers are out of bed at four o’clock in the morning milking to provide this wonderful source of protein to the nation—not only milk but also other dairy products. They will be affected, as will small convenience stores and milk vendors. I am on their side and I am also on the side of fairness. This is just not fair; it is unconscionable conduct and I hope that the minister will at least call in the ACCC to see what they can do quickly, because while they wait and procrastinate damage is being done. (Time expired)

Patrick Secker (Barker, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

May I say from the outset that I am quite astonished that for the first time in my history as a parliamentarian—and it would be interesting to look at the history of parliament since Federation—I see the opposition with far more contributions on an appropriations bill than the government has. The government members usually get up and extol all the virtues of what the appropriations bills are going to do for their electorates and what a great job the government is doing, but where are they? We outnumber them by a dozen. Where are they? It is quite astonishing. It would be really interesting to look at the history of the appropriation bills to see if this is indeed a first since Federation.

The bills before us today, Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2010-2011 and Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2010-2011, relate to government funding decisions. I have some real concerns about some of those decisions. I have just come from a hearing of the Standing Committee on Regional Australia. The National Water Commission—the chair of which, Ken Matthews, recently retired or resigned, whichever way you want to look at it—employs about 58 people at a cost of about $12 million per year. All this money being spent is basically duplicating the work of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority. So there is some money that the government could save straightaway—by looking at duplication in areas such as water management in Australia. The committee found it very frustrating trying to get answers out of the National Water Commission. They are supposed to have a blueprint to deal with overallocation and other issues, but they did not have a figure for it and they could not give us an answer—it was quite astonishing.

I have other real concerns about this government’s funding policies. I raise the issue of the Keith hospital again. I know that you, Mr Deputy Speaker Georganas, made a brave attempt to support both your federal and state governments on that issue. In its budget last year, the South Australian Labor government announced that it would cut funding to regional hospitals, including Keith, Ardrossan and Moonta. In Keith, in my electorate, the funding cut is about 60 per cent, or nearly $400,000. The Keith hospital will close its doors in April this year without this funding, despite the state Labor minister, John Hill, saying yesterday that it is all a bluff and that the hospital will not close. The state government claims to have found some savings the hospital can make to enable it to keep running. I will come back to those recommendations because they are very questionable—bordering on illegal, I believe.

When the Keith hospital closes in April—and the clock is ticking very loudly—the next closest hospitals will be Bordertown, Naracoorte and Murray Bridge. On top of forcing residents to attend already overbooked hospitals such as those, this will leave large stretches of a notoriously dangerous highway without a hospital—nearly 200 kilometres of the Dukes Highway from Bordertown to Murray Bridge and 240 kilometres from Naracoorte to Murray Bridge. These are two of the busiest stretches of road in Australia and they have some of the highest fatality rates and accident levels in South Australia, and the hospital in the middle of that region will disappear.

Surely the state and federal governments must realise how important the Keith hospital is. My motion in parliament on Monday—which we will probably not get to vote on until 24 March—said that the Keith hospital should be funded for $600,000 and that the federal government should reduce the South Australian government’s national health care specific purpose payment by the same amount. By doing that we would actually save both the federal government and the state government money. It would not cost the Australian taxpayer one cent but would save money for both the federal and state governments. The state government has applied a completely stupid economic silo rationale to come up with what it thinks are savings without realising that those savings will probably end up creating extra costs of five times that amount. The state government’s policy is really quite ridiculous, but apparently—as shown by the speeches on Monday night—the federal government is going to let it happen.

There is some history on this. Ten years ago the state government was funding Keith and District Hospital to the amount of 35 per cent of its total costs. The other 65 per cent, of course, was from the local community. This was a very significant saving to both the federal and state taxpayers. But since that 10-year figure of 35 per cent it has been whittled down gradually to about 25 per cent of the total costs now. Seventy-five per cent is paid by the community. This is already unsustainable, and these further cuts will bring it down to not much more than 10 per cent of the funding for a community hospital with 90 per cent paid by the community. That is unsustainable when you compare that to other regional hospitals that get virtually 100 per cent of their funding via the state and federal taxpayers.

So you are cutting your nose off to spite your face. It is really the most ridiculous governance that I have ever seen or heard put forward by any government in Australia. This is a hospital, I might add, that has received over $1 million in capital infrastructure funding from both the Howard government and the Rudd government. So they thought it was pretty important to relocate the doctors’ surgery out of the hospital and convert part of it into an aged-care setup. That is how a lot of country hospitals work these days. The federal government approved of the 10-year plan of the Keith and District Hospital with funding from both sides of parliament. When this closes you will lose 18 aged-care beds. Where are they going to go? We already have shortages in rural area, so you are basically going to put them out on the street. Try to find a place for them. How are you going to do that overnight? It just will not happen.

For example, the St John Ambulance service will close as a volunteer group. The local community will not support taking patients to hospitals 180 kilometres away or 100 kilometres away. They will have to put in a paid St John Ambulance—again an extra cost to the Australian taxpayers. I think it is very interesting—

A division having been called in the House of Representatives—

Before the suspension, I was about to raise an issue concerning the questionable methods recommended by the state government for the Keith hospital. In a public meeting at Keith last night, hospital chairman, James De Barro, said that Country Health SA had advised the hospital to use aged-care bonds and staff entitlements as cash flows during a business restructure. This is dodgy, to say the least. Mr De Barro said that the advice would expose the hospital to legal penalties and was potentially in breach of federal and state laws, particularly given it was on the brink of insolvency. He said:

At the end of the day, the (staff) provisions are the staff’s hard-earned capital and the board cannot and will not knowingly break any law, social or moral, with respect to other people’s money.

The board finds it difficult to understand—

And I find it extraordinarily difficult to understand—

that the State Government would suggest breaching a federal or state Act or dismissing basic moral standards was a satisfactory means of dealing with a reduction in State Government funding support.

He said that the state government had advocated using accommodation bonds and retention amounts—which are required by law to be refunded, as we all know, if needed—as operating capital. He said that the move would have provided the hospital with about $470,000 in operating capital to assist in trading out of the current problems, but it would have exposed it to legal ramifications. He said:

If, in the event the hospital were to become insolvent and the accommodation bonds had been expended, it would create significant problems to the families … as well as significant penalties, with possible legal implications to the board.

I have to say that this is the most questionable advice I have ever heard from any government anywhere in Australia. This is banana republic stuff. This is what a tyrant would do—suggest breaking its own laws. The Labor state health minister should look at this very seriously. In fact, I believe there should be an inquiry at least at state government level, if not at federal government level, on the suggestion. This is an absolute disgrace.

On another matter, I received a response from the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Senator Conroy, to an inquiry from some of my constituents in the south-east of my electorate regarding digital TV. Residents in Mount Gambier and Kingston and other areas in the south-east have felt ripped off since the digital switch-over due to ongoing problems with reception or channel availability. I took the liberty to write to the minister to seek some answers, and I have to say I was extremely disappointed to receive a letter back that insulted the intelligence of those residents. The correspondence from the minister suggested these residents have not installed their equipment properly, or basically blamed it on everything other than Labor themselves. This is a lovely bit of blame game!

These residents do not need a blame game; they need the transmitters upgraded like the government promised. Why did Labor make this region switch to digital TV if the infrastructure was not sufficiently upgraded in time? It is not good enough to say, ‘It will be upgraded, we think maybe some time in 2011, maybe next year.’ These residents were switched over in 2010. Now they have to wait a full year or more before they can even get decent reception and have access to the full suite of channels.

Of course, on the subject of youth allowance I support the amendment that has been moved by the member for Sturt. Regional students will be disappointed to learn that the government’s proposed changes to independent youth allowance next year may not mean students in the inner regional zones will be subject to the same criteria as other regional areas. Certainly, the coalition has been pushing for the government to make the criteria fairer and more equal.

The current maps used are ridiculous and do not reflect the difficulties students from many areas have in getting to university. For example, in Mount Gambier if you live inside the city boundary, you are treated differently than if you live across the road outside the boundary. We have this really ridiculous set-up where you have two classes of students depending on where you live in the country. It is crazy; it is based on the wrong criteria and it should be changed. Certainly, Minister Evans admitted that changing the criteria for the inner regional zones was not necessarily going to happen. The current legislation is unfair and needs to be fixed. (Time expired)

Stuart Robert (Fadden, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Defence Science, Technology and Personnel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to lend some brief comments on the amendment to the second reading of the Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2010-2011 and related bill. I note the opening words of the amendment:

Whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading,—

It being an appropriation bill—

the House call on the Government to bring forward its timetable for resolving the inequity … in independent youth allowance payments for inner regional students …

The amendment goes on to say, ensure that there is a review, criteria are addressed, all students who had a gap year in 2010 and meet the relevant criteria qualify and, of course, it be appropriated. The issue is the word ‘inequity’. The amendment calls on the government to address the fundamental issue of inequity. One group is being given a greater benefit over another.

One of the great things about the Australian culture and the Australian way of life; one of the great things about all people integrating and accepting our values and way of life is that we actually believe in the common vernacular term of the ‘fair go’. We are quite happy that a rising tide raises all ships. We are quite happy that when it is tough, it is tough for everyone. What we are not happy about is when a government deliberately legislates inequity, when it favours one group over another, one constituency over another. What we are not happy about is when a Labor government governs for minorities rather than governing for the majority of the country and seeking to ensure minorities and the marginalised are not impacted.

What the amendment calls on the government to do is to stop governing for minorities and to start governing for the nation whilst realising its responsibilities to the hurt, the downtrodden and the poor but not to ensure inequity is enshrined in legislation. There are so many other areas where inequity is being pushed either in legislation or by the absence of legislation. It would have been nice if, in the appropriation bill, the government had realised its responsibilities to those DFRDB recipients who had served 20 years or more and are over the age of 55in the now closed scheme and had sought to appropriate and to change provisions so that pensions would be indexed not only by CPI but by the male total average weekly earnings, MTAWE, 27.5 per cent thereof or the new living cost index. This would have removed another inequity. In 2007 government indicated that it would seek to remove this inequity. The government’s election promise stated that it would seek to install justice, all of which has fallen on deaf ears.

In 2010, the coalition made an election promise that we would index DFRDB and DFRB pensions for those aged over 55, of which there are 56,000 recipients, the same way as age pensions—through CPI, MTAWE or the living cost index, whichever was greater. In honour of that election commitment, we have introduced a private member’s bill in the Senate, which is sponsored by the honourable Senator Ronaldson and seeks both the removal of that inequity and to look at the issue of justice for those DFRDB recipients, those fighting men and women whose DFRDB pensions are not keeping pace with the cost of living. That is another area where the coalition has chosen to step up and deal with inequity, whereas the government continues to legislate for inequity. That is what the bill in the Senate seeks to address.

We look forward to the government supporting in the Senate the DFRDB bill to remove inequity. We look forward to the Greens honouring their stated election commitment, which was published on their website and is still there, that they agree with the coalition’s premise on the indexation of the defence pensions. These pensions are received by our fighting men and women, who have sacrificed so much—not only those who have served overseas but those in uniform who have moved around at the command of their government. They have sacrificed so much blood, sweat, tears and time for the government and the people of this nation. In their stated policy, the Greens have agreed that they would support the coalition on this. I look forward to the Greens honouring their promise, and I am sure that they will.

In the House of Representatives I look forward to not only the government but also the Independents, who hold the balance of power, supporting the DFRDB private member’s bill if and when it comes down from the Senate. The Independents have previously stated categorically that they would support the coalition on this. Indeed, the member for Lyne passed a motion in this place calling for this inequity to be removed. The majority of those Independents looked their retired military personnel—their veterans—in the eye during the election campaign and said, ‘We will join the coalition in standing and seeking for this inequity to be removed.’ I am sure the Independents are men of honour, and I am sure that if the bill comes to the House of Representatives they will honour the decisions they made last year and in previous years. They will honour the motions they have put forward and seek to remove this inequity.

Unfortunately, the concept of inequity that the DFRDB private member’s bill seeks to address and to remove permeates many other areas of government policy. I have been inundated for the last two days by communications on the carbon tax. The people of Fadden, on the northern Gold Coast, are genuinely and sincerely disappointed in the Treasurer and especially in the Prime Minister, the holder of the highest office and leader of leaders in the nation. Two weeks out from an election, the Prime Minister said, ‘The government I lead will not have a carbon tax.’ A more categorical statement could not have been made. The Treasurer made the point that the opposition was using the introduction of a carbon tax as an issue and completely and utterly rejected it. The word ‘reject’ is a strong, active verb. Yet having scraped through the election, fingernails left largely unintact, and having formed government with the support of the Independents, the Prime Minister and the Treasurer have now said, ‘I’m sorry; we’re going to do it anyway.’ That will put a whole range of further inequity into the nation.

The government needs to realise its responsibility and govern for all the nation. It seems that a phrase that started with the member for Griffith and has continued with the current Prime Minister—‘we will govern for all Australians’—has simply been seen as a platitude. It has become a hollow phrase with no meaning. It is a phrase that continues to be draped in the raiment of inequity, of governing for minorities rather than for the whole. In fact, in the 50 to 60 communications I have had to my office on the carbon tax, the word ‘inequity’ comes up constantly. Of these 50 to 60 I have only had two that support the government’s position. That is it—just two out of 60 of the communications my office has received on the carbon tax support what the government is bringing forward.

This is what people are sincerely disappointed with. They are not angry per se; they are probably not even astonished—perhaps they thought the government would do this after all—but they are disappointed that their Prime Minister would do it. Symptomatic of some of the communications I have had is ‘We voted for the Labor Party, we voted for the current Prime Minister, Ms Gillard, and we are so disappointed that she would treat our vote with such contempt, that she would seek such an inequitable way of addressing the risk of climate change.’ Yet dealing with things in an equitable way is the theme that this government continues to put forward.

The coalition went to the election with a very firm commitment for direct action to deal with the risk of climate change—no different to the way any other company deals with risk. When something may or may not occur, you put in a range of measures that mitigate the risk. But, while you are putting in place those mitigation measures, you should be cognisant that if the risk you are mitigating occurs, will what you put in place deal with it and, if it does not, will what you put in place have a tangible benefit subsequent to the fact? In the totality of that discussion the coalition came to the point that a direct action plan best meets those risk options. If indeed the risk of climate change comes to fruition, then a direct action plan will address the five per cent reduction on 2000 levels, which is ostensibly a 28 per cent reduction from current levels—it is not insubstantial—but, more importantly, if the risk does not turn out as catastrophically as some expect, the direct action measures will make a tangible and real and permanent and lasting difference to the fabric of our nation: it will improve air quality, it will improve green space, it will provide a larger number of trees and it will increase the yield of crops as we seek to sequester carbon in soil and increase the nutrients of that soil. The whole world recognises it is disappointing that there is only one nation in the world—one—that right now has more trees than it did 100 years ago, and that is Israel.

The issue of inequity is creeping in through so much of the government’s legislation. The amendment being put forward seeks to address this inequity. I urge the government to heed common sense and to support the opposition’s amendment so that youth allowance can be provided for all deserving Australians, not just the small and limited number that the government’s bill provides for.

Gary Gray (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service and Integrity) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to bring the debate on Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2010-2011 and Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2010-2011 to a close, and I thank those members who have made a contribution. These additional estimates bills seek appropriation authority from parliament for the additional expenditure of money from the Consolidated Revenue Fund in order to meet requirements that have arisen since the last budget. The total additional appropriation being sought through additional estimates bills Nos 3 and 4 this year is a little over $2.3 billion.

I would like to take this opportunity to clarify some measures proposed in these bills. The opposition has claimed that the $152.8 million in capital funding for immigration detention facilities is a new measure. This is not the case. These funds were previously announced, namely $97.8 million in the 2010-11 Economic Statement and $54.9 million in the 2010-11 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook.

While the government has made a decision to retain the Federal Magistrate’s Court, other plans to restructure the federal courts will proceed as announced in the 2009-10 budget. An amount of $22.1 million will be provided to the Federal Magistrate’s Court in appropriation bill No. 1 and be offset by reductions in funding for the Federal Court and Family Court.

The Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy will be provided with $12.7 million for the digital switchover Viewer Access Satellite Television service and the digital switchover communications campaign. The $11.8 million referred to in the second reading speech was one component of this re-appropriation.

In concluding this debate, there are a couple of points I would like to focus on in respect of these bills. The first is the delivery of our election commitments and I would like to raise a few of these. The first is $14.6 million to double the capacity of the Connecting People with Jobs Relocation Assistance Pilot program, which includes assisting eligible unemployed Australians to relocate to Queensland to take up employment in flood affected areas.

As flood affected areas begin the recovery, there will be a demand for labour that may not always be readily met locally. Reflecting this reality the government has expanded the Connecting People with Jobs relocation initiative and broadened the eligibility to allow for more job seekers to make use of this pilot. That pilot began on 1 January 2011. Assistance through the Connecting People with Jobs initiative could include but is not limited to a wage subsidy of $2,500 for employers, removal costs, mentoring, post-placement support, health support services, accommodation and community engagement costs, such as purchasing school uniforms.

The government is providing $22.4 million to assist Tasmanian forestry contractors and employees respond to the challenges facing the Tasmanian native forest industry. The Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry will receive $14.6 million, in Appropriation Bill (No. 3) to provide exit assistance in the form of grants to eligible contracting businesses, as well as assistance to help ensure that employees receive their full entitlements. The balance of the funding is being met from other sources. The government has delivered on its promise to make offers to successful applicants by Christmas. This was important to provide certainty for families. Individuals will now be able to make decisions about their futures with dignity.

The new Department of Regional Australia, Regional Development and Local Government will be provided with $5.9 million to strengthen local engagement and improve whole-of-government policy coordination for regional Australia. This funding is in addition to the resources that have already been transferred from other departments. As a recently established department it is growing by the day and is a dedicated agency with responsibility for regional policy and overseeing the rollout of initiatives across other departments.

As these measures make clear, the government are getting on with the task of delivering on our commitments. In addition, I would also like to point out the $120.7 million in assistance being provided to the people of Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and those in my home state of Western Australia who were affected by the recent floods. This payment was activated to assist employees, small business persons and farmers who have suffered a loss of income as a direct result of the flooding and severe weather that began in late November 2010 and that continued in February 2011 in Queensland, New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia and my home state of Western Australia.

In conclusion, these bills support the government’s budget initiatives, including a number of election commitments, and deserve widespread support. I commend the bills to the House.

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

The original question was that Appropriation Bill (No. 3) be now read a second time. To this the honourable member for Sturt has moved an amendment that all words after ‘That’ be omitted with a view to substituting other words. The immediate question now is that the words proposed to be omitted stand part of the question. Those of that opinion say aye, to the contrary no.

Gary Gray (Brand, Australian Labor Party, Minister for the Public Service and Integrity) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The noes have it.

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

As it is necessary to resolve this question to enable further questions to be considered in relation to this bill, in accordance with standing order 195 the bill will be returned to the House for further consideration.