Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I call the minister.

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Competitiveness) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Deputy Speaker, I am happy to field any questions on the portfolio that may be asked, subject to this session completing, as I understand it, at 4.15pm.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My two questions to the minister are: what is the process by which the performance bonus for senior staff, including the CEO, are typically negotiated? What role does the minister play, if any, in approving those arrangements? The minister may know that the most recent annual report for CSIRO shows that the chief executive, Megan Clark, did receive a performance bonus. What were the criteria against which that bonus was paid?

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Competitiveness) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will obtain any information that I can now in relation to Professor Megan Clark and performance bonuses. To the extent that I cannot obtain that information in a timely fashion, I will get back to the shadow minister. I would like to take this opportunity to express the government's gratitude to Professor Megan Clark, because she has been exemplary in the work that she has done for CSIRO—a great organisation in our country, which continues to work in the national interest for the people of Australia in leading-edge technology. We want that to continue, and I hope that we enjoy the support of the shadow minister in supporting the work of the CSIRO, including that of Professor Megan Clark.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have some further questions. Has the government sought to assure itself that there have been no instances where CSIRO has not acted as a model litigant and how has this been done? Is the government aware that there have been cases in which CSIRO has not acted as a model litigant? Is it correct that CSIRO employees are encouraged and even obliged under their terms of employment to report instances of suspected bullying and other forms of unsafe workplace conduct?

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Competitiveness) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will speak in relation to Professor Megan Clark and then I will go back and seek to answer the question that was asked of me. Obviously Professor Clark has been reappointed. She will remain as the chief executive—

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order. My question was not about reappointment; it was about performance bonuses and how they were calculated.

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister will answer the member for Indi's question or maybe send it to her in writing.

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Competitiveness) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If the shadow minister wants to take the opportunity to gobble up time by raising frivolous points of order, I am happy to accommodate that.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Just answer the question.

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Competitiveness) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was seeking to answer the question. Yet again, the shadow minister is more interested in not gaining information about our great scientific organisation and to use the CSIRO as a political plaything.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No; just give me the answers. You do not know the answers, do you?

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Competitiveness) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was giving you the answer—

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, you were not.

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Competitiveness) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

before you sought to utilise more of the little remaining time—

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Well, go on; go ahead.

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Competitiveness) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is the sort of attitude that we get from the coalition. There is an opportunity here to ask questions and get answers to them. Instead of doing that, because she thinks that there is someone watching and there might be a political point to be gained, she has sought to use up the short time that has been available. Why is the time short? It is because of the manoeuvres that are going on the House of Representatives chamber right now and no doubt will continue to go on.

The process has been followed. It has been a correct and proper process to ensure the position is filled in a timely manner. There was a global search—

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Deputy Speaker, with all due respect, the minister may not be acquainted with the material but he should say that. There was no question regarding the reappointment of the CEO; the question was with regard to performance based pay. Does he not understand the question? Does he want me to repeat it?

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Indi will please resume her seat. Minister, would you answer the question, please?

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Competitiveness) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I said to the shadow minister that I would obtain the information about the performance bonus processes. I would say in relation to performance bonus processes that they are clear, and I would hate to imagine that the shadow minister is seeking to impugn the reputation of Professor Megan Clark.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, I am asking a question.

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Competitiveness) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

So why the interest in the performance bonuses and about my involvement in performance bonuses? It can only be to malign the CEO of the CSIRO, and I think that is terrible.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ask the minster to withdraw that. Merely asking questions to keep this government accountable is not maligning anyone; it is doing out job. Withdraw.

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Indi, please resume your seat. Minister, please continue.

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Competitiveness) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In relation to bullying and harassment at the CSIRO, I am advised that the CSIRO has in place a range of measures to address situations where concerns are expressed about the behaviour of staff. CSIRO has engaged Emeritus Professor Dennis Pearce, former Commonwealth Ombudsman, as an independent investigator, assisted by law firm HWL Ebsworth, to review individual allegations and to identify opportunities for improvement in the organisation's processes for dealing with staff and welfare issues. Professor Pearce will provide his phase 1 reports to the CSIRO by 31 July.

It is, at least, ironic that the coalition are asking questions about harassment because we are implementing key recommendations from a report, through amendments to the Fair Work Act, to provide an individual right of recourse for victims of workplace bullying. The coalition said they would support the government's provisions. That has not happened. They have once again backflipped on a commitment that they gave, choosing to play politics rather than to protect vulnerable workers from bullying.

So, the coalition have demonstrated they cannot be trusted on workplace relations, They come here crying crocodile tears about workplace bullying or allegations thereof in the CSIRO, then actively vote down workplace bullying provisions. It just shows that the whole point of this exercise is trying to gain political points. I do not mind if they seek to do that against the government—that is fine—but to do it against the CSIRO and to attack the CSIRO CEO, Dr Megan Clark, is completely unconscionable.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have further questions and, perhaps if it assists the minister in his very new role—there has been a series of science ministers since the last election—I can give him a briefing of some of the issues. He does not seem to be fully appraised of the issues around bullying. There is an investigation instigated about bullying. I have a question—

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Competitiveness) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Deputy Speaker, I take a point of order. I resent that allegation. This government takes bullying very seriously, so seriously that we have moved amendments in the House of Representatives and the member for Indi and others have voted against them.

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There is no point of order. The member for Indi.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very pleased, with regard to bullying, that the government listened to the opposition and instigated an inquiry into CSIRO bullying, even if it is done in-house. The question is: can the minister outline the details of the consultation that the government had with the CSIRO in the lead-up to the announcement of the industry statement in February.

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Competitiveness) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, I cannot talk to the minister about that in terms of consultation with the CSIRO industry statement because the CSIRO would have been involved in work on industry policy, as they have done in the past and as they will be in the future. Given that the carriage, as the shadow minister knows very well, of the industry statement is actually by Minister Combet, perhaps it might have been sensible for the member for Indi to provide that question to Minister Combet. Maybe a question on notice would have been a more satisfactory approach to this issue.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Do I take it from that answer that the government's own science minister has no idea what involvement CSIRO had with the lead-up to the industry announcement?

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Competitiveness) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What you can take from me is that the minister—who has just arrived—oversaw the preparation of, I think, a landmark innovation-in-industry statement. It is a statement that has very widespread support. It also has support from the automotive industry, in which we have invested heavily and which the coalition would rip out half of its funding in 2015 alone—a fact that the shadow minister has acknowledged. Why? Because her shadow expenditure review committee rolled her. She has to go around the nation saying, 'We support auto workers' but in truth what they are doing is saying to the auto workers of Victorian and, more broadly, all the component manufacturers, 'Vote for us and we will cut your jobs; we will cut half your assistance by 2015 and that is coalition policy.'.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker, the question was not about the auto sector but specifically in regard to the involvement of CSIRO in the government's announcement. But he does not know the answer.

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Indi, please resume your seat.

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Trade and Competitiveness) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the point of order, the question was about the industry statement. The industry statement establishes innovation precincts. It supports a range of industries including the automotive industry. That is why I was answering the question. It was entirely relevant and, given that the shadow minister has no sensible questions to ask and that she has come here simply to try to score some points at the expense of the government, that is fine. But at the expense of Dr Megan Clark, that is not fine and at the expense of the CSIRO, that is not fine. I think you will find that time has expired.

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, thank you, Minister, you are correct there. The time for the debate has expired.

The Federation Chamber will now consider the climate change, industry, innovation and small business segment of the Industry, Innovation, Climate Change, Science, Research and Tertiary Education portfolio, in accordance with the agreed order of consideration. Minister, do you want to make a statement?

Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change, Industry and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Deputy Speaker. The government, of course, as has been well articulated, is committed to developing a clean energy future and at the same time ensuring a strong and prosperous economy with very strong policies and the support of industry and innovation.

A division having been called in the House of Representatives—

Sitting suspended from 16:1 6 to 16:29

When proceedings were suspended, I was just about to remark that, since the last appropriations in the portfolio areas, the government have brought together the functions of climate change and industry and innovation into the overall department. Climate change, of course, is an important part of the government's policy agenda. It is an environmental problem which requires an economic solution, and that is why we have merged the responsibility for climate change policy into the department responsible for driving innovation and industry policy in the economy. The need to reduce carbon pollution and to transform the economy to compete in a low carbon global economy will be the key drivers of Australia's industrial structure.

The evidence is clear that the carbon price is working: emissions are down and renewable energy is up, and the economy is remaining strong. It is worth putting on the record, I think, that, since the carbon price started on 1 July last year, emissions in the National Electricity Market are down 7.4 per cent, renewable energy generation is up almost 30 per cent, the economy is growing, and today's national accounts figures show that real GDP has grown at an annualised rate of 2.5 per cent since the carbon price started. That means that our economy has expanded by 14 per cent since Labor was elected in 2007. More than 150,000 new jobs have been created since carbon pricing commenced. Inflation remains contained at 2.5 per cent, the midpoint of the RBA target range. Millions of households have been assisted with tax cuts, increases in family tax benefits and higher pensions and allowances, and the impact on the cost of living has been lower than expected. That means that the assistance has gone further in helping low- and middle-income earners to make ends meet.

The fact is that the clean energy policies we have implemented are environmentally effective; they are economically responsible; and they are socially fair. Reducing the emissions intensity of the economy, the amount of greenhouse gas emissions per unit of economic output, is in fact critical to Australia's future competitiveness and to the integrity of our trading relationships. Our trading partners want to see what Australia is doing while they are also taking action on climate change. We are the 12th largest economy in the world. We are the 15th largest emitter of greenhouse gases, and we are the largest emitter of greenhouse gases per person amongst all of the advanced economies. It is fantasy to believe that our trading partners, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region, have no interest in Australia tackling the issue of climate change in partnership with them. The policy of the alternative government, of course, is to do nothing, in essence—nothing.

The government also supports jobs and growth in the economy. We support manufacturing with a strong set of policies. We understand that you cannot have a strong economy without a strong and sustainable manufacturing sector that employs nearly one million Australians across the country in well-paid, high-skilled jobs. We are acutely aware that the sector is facing challenges from the high value of the Australian dollar and intense import competition. To deal with those pressures, the government is investing a billion dollars to support and grow jobs.

Our plan released in February, A Plan for Australian Jobs, has three core strategies: backing Australian firms to win more work at home; supporting Australian industry to innovate, increase exports and win business abroad; and helping Australian SMEs to grow and create new jobs. The whole package builds on the support we have delivered in many sectors already, including measures like the Steel Transformation Plan, with $300 million to support steelworkers' jobs; the $5.4 billion New Car Plan, supporting the auto-manufacturing sector; and $1.2 billion in clean technology investment programs helping to transform the energy efficiency and emissions intensity of the manufacturing sector. All of these policies are funded in the budget announced in May. All of them are very important for tackling both climate change and the economic challenges the country has.

Bruce Billson (Dunkley, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Small Business, Competition Policy and Consumer Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My understanding is that Minister Combet is also handling small business this evening, so I hope that is a satisfying experience. That would make six ministers in 16 months handling small business. It is good; you are probably at no more disadvantage than the incumbent—but thank you. Minister, I will just draw your attention to some of the commentary on budget night. ACCI said:

The nation's economic engine room of two million small businesses employing seven million people are too big to ignore but the budget largely leaves them shortchanged …

It said the 'budget ignores small business and hard savings choices'. A further statement was:

There's not one small business initiative worth speaking about tonight …

The Food and Grocery Council said:

… there was little in the budget to stimulate growth and confidence, and nothing to relieve the ever increasing regulatory burden on business.

The New South Wales chamber of commerce commentary was: 'Small business has been ignored again'—et cetera et cetera.

My first question is to invite you to see if you can identify any single specific positive measure directly intended to support the small business community. We could find no such measure in any of the budget documentation that has been available. Some commentary since has sought to cobble together bits and pieces going on elsewhere that may happen to go past a window of a small business in terms of their support.

My second question relates to some of the measures that are included. I refer to the bringing forward of tax liabilities to a monthly payment arrangement for many Australian businesses, and an observation by some that that risks transferring the cash-flow burden to small business, where those caught up in that measure will need to rejig their own cash flow to respond to the tax office requirements—and that may be to the detriment of small business. I also invite you to advise whether any analysis has been done on the impact of that measure now, given that it was originally inspired by the prospect of a budget surplus that now is not on the horizon. The small businesses of Australia would have to see Labor elected four times before there is any prospect of a surplus.

In relation to business confidence, there is the really worrying sign that, since Labor was elected, nearly 243,000 jobs have been lost from small business. Yet the government and the budget seem completely unresponsive to those job losses from what should be the engine room of the economy but actually feels like one that has had some cylinders taken out. Minister, it is a fact that there are 3,000 fewer small businesses employing people in the latest figures, compared to when your government was elected. Again, if you could point me to any measure in the document that seeks to turn that around and look beyond the economy as it is now to one where small business and enterprise are valued and supported, that would be helpful.

There is also further money in the budget, on top of the $125 million, to fix the business names register—$7.8 million. I am looking for your assurance that that will fix the problems with the register, including the broken promise of this government not to breach the privacy of home based businesses—a promise that has not been kept that we sought to pursue with the government late last year, to no avail.

Finally, one of the things the government likes to point to in the budget is its establishment of a small business commissioner, an able person that does not actually have a commission. There is no clear purpose or legislative basis for that role. We learnt through the budget and in Senate estimates last night that it is not actually an ongoing program, so that token interest is actually disappearing, even though the government announced this position—a commissioner with no commission—as being really significant to ensuring small business remains at the forefront of government policy-making.

Minister, essentially the thesis that the public is providing on the budget as it relates to small business is that it is not the kick-start they were looking for but just another kick; and it is making an already difficult situation worse, one compounded by the world's largest carbon tax, which you have spoken about—that small business is supposed to simply suck it up or pass on the costs of that tax, when anyone with any appreciation of the real economy would know that, in many cases, neither is possible.

Are we to expect some new declaration of interest in small business in the 101 days before the next election? There is no provision for that in the budget, and I am wondering whether we can expect some sort of PR campaign cobbling together remotely related things as a substitute for a policy. (Time expired)

Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change, Industry and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That is a pretty long list of questions that the member for Dunkley has advanced there, but I will do my best to work my way through them.

The starting point is that the most important thing for small businesses, medium-sized businesses and large businesses, and the workforce generally, is that the economic settings are right. As the national accounts evidenced today, our economy is growing; real GDP is growing at an annualised rate of 2½ per cent. Very, very few economies internationally, particularly advanced economies, can claim such a growth rate. We have had, I think, two decades of continuous growth. We avoided the global financial crisis, we made investments in jobs and growth, and that same approach is, of course, reflected in this budget. I do not know that the coalition's strategy on fiscal policy would be of assistance to small business if the strategy involves cutting deeply and imposing austerity measures in the circumstances we are in. That would have a contractionary effect and it would be felt very sharply by the small-business community in particular. So the government has taken the view in fiscal strategy as a general approach in the budget, as we have in recent years, of making the investments that are necessary to continue economic growth and continue a positive environment for investment.

What else is relevant to small business? Small businesses are benefitting not only from the annual economic growth we are experience but also from the significant fall in interest rates that we have seen in recent years. The official cash rate now stands at 2.75 per cent. We have got a stable inflationary environment, as I indicated earlier, with inflation at around 2.5 per cent—the mid-point of the RBA target range—and we have one of the lowest unemployment rates in the world. The member pointed to some employment numbers and issues. Again, the important thing at a macroeconomic level is that, since 2007, almost one million jobs have been created in our economy—and at a time during which the international circumstances have been extremely adverse—and growth has been experienced across the economy, not just in resources and resource related sectors.

On issues specifically to assist business, there are a range of measures in the budget that have been supported that I would draw the member's attention to. I referred earlier to the $1 billion investment plan, A Plan for Australian Jobs, which will assist small businesses grow and compete in global markets and create jobs. One of the features of that plan is to oblige the proponents of major projects worth more than $500 million, for example, to prepare Australian industry participation plans. These are plans that can and will benefit small and medium size enterprises gain access to the work that is going to be contracted in goods and services not only through the construction phase of major projects but also in their operational phase subsequently.

As part of the plan, also relevant to small and medium size enterprises, the government is investing about $350 million in Venture Australia, a venture capital fund. It will be matched dollar for dollar in the private sector to stimulate Australia's venture capital market. The experience with SMEs, in particular those that are innovative and have ideas and technologies they want to commercialise, is that they often have trouble getting access to the venture capital that is necessary to help them commercialise their circumstances. That is a significant initiative that has had bipartisan support over the years, but the government has invested another $350 million in it, with a track record of success.

There is also in the budget a new $27.7 million Enterprise Solutions Program to assist small and medium size businesses gain access to public sector markets; the idea being that, when a government—and in this case, obviously the Commonwealth—intends tendering or contracting for a particular good or service, there will be a fund that will be accessible to SMEs to help them successfully develop the materials and do the work to be able to tender in a public sector procurement process. That is important. I can return to the issue again, but there is also very important funding of $500 million for up to 10 industry innovation precincts that, in particular, will be important for SMEs. I can return to that issue shortly, and there are other measures that I can also turn to in relation to small business.

Stephen Jones (Throsby, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister, in your opening statement you talked about the challenging environment that manufacturing, in particular, is facing, with competition from emerging economies, the high Australian dollar, higher input costs—particularly in the steel sector with coal and iron ore over the past three years at times hitting record prices. I am interested in some of the measures—some of which you have identified—that are supporting manufacturing. It matters a lot in my electorate, the electorate of Throsby in New South Wales, which has traditionally had a big reliance on manufacturing and related industries for regional wealth creation and of course jobs.

I know it is outside of your portfolio specifically, but some of it falls within your portfolio. I count eight specific measures, one of them being the antidumping measures that have gone through a number of amendments over the last 12 months to bring them into line with international practice and the current circumstances. I would like to hear from you, Minister, why that and how that is important to Australian manufacturing businesses.

Minister, you also mentioned the innovation precincts in response to a question from the member for Dunkley. I am interested in how the innovation precincts would assist local manufacturers, not only now but into the future. The steel industry innovation plan is an important program for the steel makers in my electorate, particularly BlueScope. Why was that plan important, and how is it making a difference? Minister, could you advise us on how that is making a difference in securing the future of the steel industry in this country? I think you have already gone to the clean energy investment programs, so I will not question you further on that. The automotive industry innovation program is an important program. We know the industry is going through a lot of stress at the moment. Are there any threats to the ongoing future of that program?

Finally, there is the Australian jobs legislation, the Australian Jobs Bill, which passed through the House of Representatives last week. A crucial part of that program looks at Australian industry participation plans. Of course, these are not new. We have had Australian industry participation plans in place for quite some time. What is new about the arrangements in the Australian Jobs Bill? What other provisions included in the bill will make a difference?

When I talk to manufacturers in my electorate, one of their common retorts is: 'We can't win work in a lot of these large resources, government and other related projects. We get mickey mouse invitations to tender. Sometimes they come in on the Friday and close on the Monday. We want to know what the government is going to do. How is this bill going to make a difference for businesses such as this to win work in these large projects and how is it going to support local manufacturing?'

Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change, Industry and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Throsby for those important questions. As I indicated earlier, the government announced in February a $1 billion plan for Australian jobs, and included within that are many of the measures which the member for Throsby is inquiring about. The first important part of the plan involves the establishment of Australian industry participation obligations on major project proponents—major projects being those worth more than $500 million—regardless of what part of the economy they may be in. Many people immediately think of the resources sector, which of course is a case, but it may in fact be a wind farm or a new power station. What is new in particular is that we formulated to implement that policy, the Australian Jobs Bill, and it is currently before the Senate, having passed the House. That will place for the first time a legal obligation on the proponents of these major projects to prepare Australian industry participation plans in consultation with a new statutory agency, the Australian Industry Participation Authority.

The project proponents must, under the legislation and under the eye of the authority, provide fair and reasonable opportunity to Australian businesses to successfully tender in for the goods and services during the construction phase and the early operational phases of these projects. That is new. An AIP plan previously only obtained in relation to certain government procurements worth more than $20 million and in relation to tariff concessions made under the Enhanced Project By-law Scheme. This will now apply to all projects worth more than $500 million.

In consultation with manufacturers, whom we expect to benefit significantly from this legislation and this policy approach, they have raised many issues concerning the specifications, the timing, the lack of information, the lack of transparency and the lack of accountability that many project proponents have taken in their approach to date. For example, it is argued by the manufacturing sector that, with some of the major projects in Australia, the large international corporations come along and bring their global supply chain with them, because they know that supply chain works to particular quality standards, they are familiar with their supply chain and they simply engage in the contract to do the work through their contractors. We have to create the transparency and the accountability to ensure that manufacturers and SMEs have the opportunity to successfully tender in. The detail in the Australian Jobs Bill will ensure that that is the case, and I have indicated to industry that if they see any concern for the way in which it is working they must raise it with the government and we will act upon it. Any fair and reasonable concern will be dealt with.

In relation to other measures that the government has put in place that the member inquired about, antidumping is also extremely important. Measures are before the House at the moment, a further tranche of reforms to the antidumping arrangements and the resourcing for Customs to properly pursue antidumping applications. These are important reforms which are critical to the viability of many areas of manufacturing in our country. We put those proposals together—myself and the Minister for Home Affairs—after quite extensive consultation with the business community, and especially the manufacturing sector and the Australian Industry Group, being the peak body. Those antidumping provisions will provide better access to remedies for dumped products. They will provide fast access and much more transparency and ability on the part of Customs to be able to deal with antidumping arrangements. Without any doubt, there has been in a number of markets a development of a glut of products on global markets, and many businesses have raised these issues with the government in the context of dumping. We want to deal with that issue and we want to get the legislation through as expeditiously as possible.

The member also asked me—and I can return to it in due course—about the steel plan, which is important for his region in the Illawarra in the south coast of New South Wales. The government has put $300 million into supporting the transformation of the steel sector, and it is to support steelworkers' jobs. Labor has done that. The coalition opposed to that particular piece of legislation. The government remains committed to it, and we will fight to ensure that we support steelworkers' jobs.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have three brief questions for the minister. The first is that on the department's industry website key automotive statistics are fairly old and out of date; they date back to 2011 or earlier in some cases. What are the most up-to-date figures for the following categories: vehicle production, exports, turnover, labour productivity and R&D? If the minister does not know, when will the opposition be able to have this information?

My second question is: who is attending the so-called crisis talks meetings on the car industry with the government on Friday, and is it true that at least one of the local car manufacturing companies is not even coming to the talks? If so, which one?

My third question is one that Senator Lundy could not answer in Senate estimates yesterday, so I will ask the minister. Will Ford's decision last month to shut down all of its car manufacturing in Australia change the total amount of money the government will make available through the ATS to 2020, and if so in what way?

Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change, Industry and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the shadow minister for her question. I did not quite get all the figures that she is after, but I can undertake to refer to the Hansard and provide her an answer in relation to those issues. I do not have the production figures—

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

When?

Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change, Industry and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will do it as expeditiously as I can—there is no need to have any concern about that. In terms of the talks this coming Friday, I think the member asked me who is not coming. I am expecting all the principal representatives of the industry to be there. I have not been appraised of any apologies. However, what I can say is that it is an important discussion for representatives of the industry, including the unions and with the government, to consider all of the challenges that the industry is facing. Principal among those challenges is the issue of the high value of the Australian dollar. It is important to contemplate for a moment that for each one-cent appreciation in the value of the Australian dollar vis-a-vis the US dollar the impact on competitiveness of an Australian manufactured car that, for example, retails for $25,000 is $250. We have seen significant appreciation in the exchange rate in recent years, and in the last two years in particular, that has impacted significantly on the competitiveness of the automanufacturing industry in Australia. On top of that, the industry is going through massive structural change, at a global level. All of the major motor-vehicle manufacturers are restructuring their operations internationally. As is well known, there were various bailout arrangements put in place in the United States for Ford and General Motors.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Deputy Speaker, on a point of order of relevance: with all due respect, I am appraised of those facts regarding the automotive sector. Specifically, I asked if he knew if any of the local car-manufacturing companies were not attending. He said he did not know, so I would appreciate it if he could move to my last question regarding the ATS.

Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change, Industry and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is important to ensure that there is proper understanding of the issues confronting the industry, and the restructuring of the industry globally is very important. A lot of investment is going into expanded production in China. Expected production runs in a motor-vehicle manufacturing facility in China might be 250,000 units per year or 300 units per year or more. The major motor-vehicle manufacturers are looking at their operations internationally, comparing them to that sort of benchmark and the economies of scale that can be achieved and also contemplating the development of vehicles that are essentially globally designed and that are uniformly marketed across a range of markets.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Answer the question.

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The minister will be heard in silence.

Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change, Industry and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

These are important matters for consideration, the way in which the relevant vehicle-manufacturing industry is working. Within the context of the Australian operations, Ford is looking at its Chinese operations, looking at the capital upgrade that might have been necessary for production of new models post 2016, looking at the production capacity of its plant at Broadmeadows and the engine facility at Geelong and it came to a view, communicated to the government a couple of weeks ago, that it would no longer continue production past 2016. That international context is extremely important.

Mrs Mirabella interjecting—

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Indi will allow the minister to complete his answer.

Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change, Industry and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Automotive Transformation Scheme is a critical public policy component in the investment decisions that businesses, both the major motor-vehicle manufacturers and the suppliers, are taking. The government has committed money through to 2015 and beyond under the Automotive Transformation Scheme. The contrast here is that the coalition's policy is to remove $500 million—which I understand has been confirmed, again, since Ford's announcement—from the ATS up to 2015 and then they have put at risk and created uncertainty about $1½ billion committed to the ATS and other measures beyond 2015. If you are an investor in a motor-vehicle manufacturing plant—

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You are a disgrace!

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Indi will withdraw.

Sophie Mirabella (Indi, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry and Science) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw, but the minister has been afraid to answer questions about his own policy. The minister has been gutless in refusing to answer questions.

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Indi will desist from defying the chair.

Steve Gibbons (Bendigo, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Obviously, the shadow minister does not understand the answer and does not like the answer, but it is the answer. She should accept that and desist from interjecting.

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the member for Bendigo seeking the call or a point of order? What was that? It was a point of order.

Greg Hunt (Flinders, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Climate Action, Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question to the minister relates to the carbon tax on fuel for heavy trucks, which is due to take effect as of 1 July 2014. Can the minister confirm that it is the government's intention to proceed with a second phase of the carbon tax and that it is budgeted within the forward estimates to include a tax of approximately $510 million in 2014-15 alone, and does the minister dispute the evidence given to the Senate inquiry on the scrutiny of new taxes—in particular, the carbon tax pricing mechanism of Friday, 22 July 2011—by Mr Tony Sheldon the National Secretary of the Transport Workers' Union?

Mr Sheldon said that depending on the size of the vehicle and the industry sector, the carbon-tax impost 'would mean in some circumstances that people would have anything from a five per cent to a 15 per cent decrease, each year in their home, of their take-home earnings after all costs are taken out'. He was referring specifically in that context to the impact of the heavy vehicle carbon tax.

So, to summarise: would the minister confirm whether it is the government's intention to introduce a second round of carbon tax in the form of a tax on fuel for heavy trucks from 1 July 2014; that that constitutes approximately $510 million in the forward estimates for that year alone; and whether or not he agrees with the estimates by the national secretary of the TWU as to the impact on take-home pay?

Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change, Industry and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Firstly, I re-emphasise that the carbon price that the government announced in 2011 and implemented effective from 1 July last year is working. I will come to the specifics of the member for Flinder's question but it is important to emphasise that in the first 11 months of the operation of the carbon price mechanism emissions in the national electricity market are down by 7.4 per cent. It is an equivalent of a 12-million-tonne reduction of greenhouse gasses in the national electricity market. Renewable energy generation in the market is up almost 30 per cent, all at the same time as the economy is growing with the national accounts confirming today an annualised rate of growth in real GDP of 2.5 per cent.

Since carbon pricing started 150,000 jobs have been created, inflation is contained, the CPI impact has been less than the Treasury modelling suggested, millions of households have been assisted with tax cuts, along with increases in family tax benefits, higher pensions and allowances. The impact on the cost of living having been lower than anticipated, of course that household assistance goes further. So, all the nonsense that the coalition have gone on about is to be regarded with the greatest scepticism. There is not one thing that has been said in the terror campaign that the coalition has run about carbon pricing that has had the slightest bit of validity, integrity or legitimacy—all rubbish.

Part of what we announced in 2011, so it is not new at all, is that until 30 June 2014 there will be no effective equivalent carbon price imposed on heavy on-road vehicles. That remains the case. The budget does reflect the policy provision that was announced in 2011, that the government is committed to and that is reflected in the budget papers, that there would be an equivalent carbon price on heavy on-road vehicles subject to the specific detail that would be brought forward from 1 July 2014.

This is important to contemplate from the stand point that the coalition have gone running around for the last two years arguing that the carbon price is going to destroy the economy—it has not and we now have had 11 months of experience. They said it would be the end of the world—it has not been the end of the world—and that the price was going to go up and up and up. Now they are running around because of low market prices in the European market, arguing it is terrible because it is going to go down and down and down.

Contained in the budget are revised projections, independently formulated by the Treasury, for carbon pricing from the time that we move to an internationally linked emissions trading scheme on 1 July 2015. I am sure that the member is well familiar with them. That means from 1 July 2015, subject of course to the market conditions and there are two more budgets before that time when Treasury will of course be revising their projections and ultimately their estimates and forecasts as that time nears, the price may be lower than the coalition is endeavouring to try to terrify people, including those in the heavy on-road vehicle industry.

The carbon price is an important environmental reform. It has been implemented in an economically responsible manner. It has been implemented in a manner that is socially fair—

Greg Hunt (Flinders, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Climate Action, Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Deputy Speaker, I have a point of order. Very briefly, on relevance, I did ask specifically about the actual quantum in the forward estimates for 2014-15.

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

The minister has another minute to answer. I call the minister.

Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change, Industry and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Of course we stand by the figures in the budget papers. Mr Sheldon is a person with whom I am very familiar, having been a colleague of his for many years. We do have a bit of a different view about the remarks that he made during 2011. I have had the opportunity to discuss things with him subsequently over the last couple of years. I am not too sure whether he would sustain the same comments but that is a matter for him to observe.

The fact of the matter is this is a perfectly economically efficient, responsible and manageable reform that has been made. It is reducing emissions and it is environmentally effective. We have done it in a way that is socially fair. In relation to concerns that the member for Flinders raised about its impact on the livelihoods of particular operators and their heavy on-road industry—(Time expired)

Steve Gibbons (Bendigo, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the Parliamentary Secretary for Climate Change, Industry and Innovation able to inform the chamber about any initiatives of the carbon pricing mechanism?

Yvette D'Ath (Petrie, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Bendigo for his question. I know there are many members on this side of the House that are very interested in the carbon price mechanism. I go specifically to the area that I have responsibility in, the Carbon Farming Initiative. I know there are many members who are interested in what opportunities the government has provided to the land sector as part of the Clean Energy Future plan.

As the member would be aware, the federal Labor government's Clean Energy Future plan has four key elements. One of those elements is the carbon price; secondly, the renewable energy; thirdly, the energy efficiency; and, importantly, action on the land. The Carbon Farming Initiative is a key element of that plan to take action for our agriculture, forestry and landfill sectors.

The CFI as it is known is a voluntary scheme. It is there to encourage the agricultural, forestry and landfill sectors to take action to reduce their greenhouse emissions or to increase their carbon storage through changing their agricultural, forestry and landfill practices. This is referred to as abatement. Those activities in those sectors, if they are achieving additional abatement, are able to create additional Australian carbon credits. These credits then can be sold in the market. There is a lot of good work and opportunity there for the land sector.

The CFI is this government's central policy for helping Australia's agricultural, forestry and landfill sectors to play a very important part in the emerging clean economy and it is yielding benefits. We are now approaching 12 months since the Clean Energy Future plan commenced. In that time we have bedded down the CFI and busied ourselves with refining its detailed rules and methodologies. We have established rigorous expert review and integrity provisions that are ensuring that every tonne of carbon pollution offset by the CFI is a real tonne of carbon pollution. We have worked with farmers, landholders, and agricultural and forestry industries to establish projects and to support them to engage with Australia's carbon market.

The CFI is a very good policy that is having real impacts for regional Australia. Farmers, landholders and regional communities are benefiting from new income that has flowed from the scheme and from the new jobs that are flowing to the regions. I know Deputy Speaker, Livermore, you are from a regional electorate and would appreciate the importance of the Carbon Farming Initiative.

As already stated, the CFI provides farmers with the ability to create carbon credits and sell those into the market. But those credits will only fetch a decent price in the market if it has confidence that they represent real abatement. The integrity of the CFI is critical to the success of the scheme. That is why this government has established the Domestic Offsets Integrity Committee, known as the DOIC, to oversee the consideration of activities and methodologies, and to make recommendations to the government.

The DOIC ensures that any carbon abatement is in addition to normal practice. The DOIC consists of a panel of eminent scientists and land sector specialists whose role is to assess and stress test every methodology before it is allowed in. All activities that can generate credits under the CFI can only do so because the committee has assessed them as being robust.

The importance of this committee cannot be overstated. I certainly wish to thank the committee for their efforts over the past year. The committee really is a gatekeeper for the CFI, and it bears the important responsibility for ensuring the scheme is credible. In undertaking that task, the committee is assisted through the establishment of many partnerships with Australia's leading universities and research institutions to unlock the next generation of abatement opportunities on the land.

It is important to note that there is a lot happening in this space. The DOIC has been working hard to assess proposals that have been put forward since its commencement. I am pleased to report the CFI has grown in scope and coverage in the past year. The CFI relies on the existence of methodologies for each covered activity, and we now have 15 methodologies in place covering a range of abatement opportunities across the forestry sector, dairies, piggeries, landfill and grassland. Farmers can now own carbon credits by revegetating marginal lands on their properties; foresters can earn credits by reforesting cleared land; dairies and piggeries are able to earn credits by capturing methane from their facilities and burning those emissions before they escape into the atmosphere; and landfill operators can earn carbon credits by diverting organic waste and treating it safely. The member will be pleased to know that there is more on the way; in coming months, further methodologies will be finalised and new projects established. (Time expired)

Greg Hunt (Flinders, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Climate Action, Environment and Heritage) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the minister, and I am following on from his earlier answer. During the course of that answer the minister made reference to the fact that the price paid after 2015-16 may in fact be lower than the revenue projections in the budget. I would ask the minister whether he stands by the revenue projections in the budget, or whether he is indicating that the actual expectation of the government is for a lower price—consistent with the forward European market price—than has been projected in the budget. In short, is there a black hole in the budget, or was the statement about lower prices merely false? It is a binary question; only one answer can be true. I will just note this: the government's price projection for 2015-16 in the budget is down from $29 in last year's budget to $12.10 in this year's budget. That is approximately twice the current trading range for European permits in the three-year forward market. It is, a year later, three times the trading range for forward permits in the European market. So the question to the minister is, which is correct—are the government's revenue projections correct, or is the European market correct? Are we going to be paying over what the rest of the world is paying, or is there a black hole in the government's budget?

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

The question is:

That the proposed expenditure be agreed to.

Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change, Industry and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you very much, Deputy Speaker. Of course, there is no black hole. We stand behind all of the figures contained in the budget. That is not what I was adverting to in my previous comment; I was making the point that the coalition has gone around the community saying that prices are going to go up and up, in this moronic manner of political opportunism—and yet they are now complaining that the price is going to be lower. They are complaining about it! What is represented in the budget, of course, are figures that are revised projections by the Treasury. There were extensive—

Mr Hunt interjecting—

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

The member for Flinders has asked his question. The member has the call.

Greg Combet (Charlton, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Climate Change, Industry and Innovation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And time is tight. I would refer the member for Flinders to the questioning of the Treasury officials today in the senate estimates about these issues. I thought the questions were handled very well by the Treasury. I remind the member for Flinders that all of those estimates and projections are done independently by the Treasury. The government stands behind the budget and the figures contained in it for carbon price revenue, and the carbon price figures.

Proposed expenditure agreed to.

Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy

Proposed expenditure $1,860,473,000

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the order for consideration of the proposed expenditures agreed to on Monday, 3 June 2013 by the Federation Chamber be varied by next considering the proposed expenditure for the Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy Portfolio and then the proposed expenditures for the Regional Australia, Local Government, Arts and Sport Portfolio, the Infrastructure and Transport Portfolio and the Prime Minister and Cabinet Portfolio.

Question agreed to.

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

The question is:

That the proposed expenditure be agreed to.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Through the 2013-14 appropriation bills the government will provide the portfolio with $7 billion to deliver its priorities. This includes $6.8 billion directly to the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, of which $5.1 billion is an equity injection into NBN Co. It also includes $1.1 billion through the department to the ABC; $273.8 million through the department to the SBS; $111.6 million to the Australian Communications and Media Authority; and $90.4 million to the Telecommunications Universal Service Management Agency.

The government is providing over $178 million in new funding to the portfolio for a range of measures. This includes $50 million to the department for a range of important programs, including $26.6 million over five years to assist free-to-air television broadcasters to relocate their digital television services to new television channels; $12.9 million for expanding the Digital Enterprise and Digital Local Government programs; $2.5 million to extend the Satellite Phone Subsidy Scheme for a further year; and $5.4 million over five years to assist the production and transmission of community radio.

The federal Labor government is very proud of our support of the public broadcasters, the ABC and the SBS. They provide a vital service to the nation. As the regional development minister can I say that the role that the ABC play in regional Australia cannot be underestimated in terms of providing a service to the community, particularly at times when information on natural disasters is important to be transmitted in real time. In addition to the continuing base funding of $2.5 billion over three years, $182 million will be provided to the ABC for new measures, including a loan to assist in the construction of a purpose-built facility at Southbank in Melbourne; funding to enable the expansion of ABC news and current affairs; funds to enable it to meet growing audience demand for its digital media services; and funding to produce documentaries commemorating the Anzac Centenary.

In addition to the continuation of its base funding of $569 million over three years for SBS, $20 million will be provided to the SBS to enable it to build on the success of its digital initiatives. I note that the SBS has recently expanded some of its language services to facilitate access to some of the newer communities that have arrived in Australia in recent times. I congratulate them and the leadership that they show in the community in promoting inclusiveness as an essential element of the success of multicultural Australia.

The 2013-14 budget also provides additional funding to the ACMA. This includes $10.5 million for the high-frequency direction finding upgrade to continue support the high-frequency bands used by the aviation, maritime, defence and emergency services communities, as well as $6 million to continue its revenue assurance project.

This budget also includes a $5.1 billion equity injection to NBN Co. The budget papers reconfirm the total equity contribution to NBN Co. will be $30.4 billion. The National Broadband Network is the largest infrastructure project in our nation's history. The NBN is about transforming telecommunications and the economy by investing in the infrastructure that we need now and that we will also need for the future. This is critical infrastructure that our country needs for the 21st century.

Only this Labor government will make the smart investments that Australia needs for our future. The National Broadband Network, along with the National Plan for School Improvement, DisabilityCare Australia and the Nation Building Program are all important parts of this. Our funding announced in the 2013-14 budget for the Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy portfolio will encourage a vibrant, sustainable and internationally competitive digital economy in Australia. (Time expired)

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Communications and Broadband) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have a number of matters to raise with the minister. I am going to deal first with the issue of asbestos, as that seems to be in the forefront of attention at the moment. In the spirit of seeking some enlightenment—light as opposed to heat—I invite the minister to respond substantively, if he can; if he cannot answer substantively, then he should say so, rather than giving a sort of ad hominem spray, which is what we had from his counterpart Mr Shorten. This is the issue I want to seek the minister's views on. We know that the received wisdom, official wisdom, on asbestos is—and I am quoting now from the code of practice How to Manage and Control Asbestos in the Workplace, at page 17. It says here:

If asbestos or ACM—

asbestos-containing material—

is in good condition and left undisturbed, it is unlikely that airborne asbestos will be released into the air and the risk to health is extremely low. It is usually safer to leave it and review its condition over time. However, if the asbestos or ACM has deteriorated, has been disturbed, or if asbestos-contaminated dust is present, the likelihood that airborne asbestos will be released into the air is increased.

This is consistent across all the official material on dealing with asbestos.

It was from a similar official publication, the Code of Practice for the Safe Removal of Asbestos, that Telstra quoted in writing to Mr Shorten as the MP for Maribyrnong in 2009, when they said that the removal of asbestos-containing materials can potentially expose workers and others to higher levels of fibre than leaving the material in situ. Telstra's approach has been not to seek to replace asbestos-containing material unless the pit is disturbed for whatever reason. Of course, what we have seen with the advent of the NBN's deal with Telstra in 2011 is very widespread disturbance and hence a much bigger asbestos management problem than was the case back in 2009. The Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations has made it clear now that, despite the interest he evinced in 2009, he did not raise his concerns about this with either the communications minister or NBN and Telstra in 2011 or 2012.

I want to know from the minister whether it is the government's view—and this is simply to get some clarity on this—that the official standards should be changed or are mistaken and whether Telstra's practice is no longer valid in the sense of not seeking to replace intact undisturbed asbestos-containing material which is in situ—that is to say, buried under the ground—and only to replace it when it is being disturbed. Of course, as the minister knows, hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of the Telstra pits are being replaced because they are too small for the NBN's purposes.

This is an important point because there is a lot of undisturbed asbestos-containing material in the Telstra network that will not be disturbed even with the NBN, and of course there is an even vaster amount of asbestos-containing material in people's houses and garages and schools and hospitals that is intact and undisturbed. The question is: given the remarks that the workplace relations minister has made, is the government's view that there should be, as Mr Shorten recommended in 2009, proactive material of otherwise stable, undisturbed, intact asbestos-containing material?

If that were to be the government's approach, that is a very significant change of policy, and there is a lack of clarity at the moment as to whether there is now a change of policy on dealing with asbestos-containing material.

Janelle Saffin (Page, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have a question, Minister. It is to do with the record funding for the ABC and SBS, but I have a statement that I want to make about it first. The ABC and SBS are two of Australia's most important and trusted cultural institutions. The government is proud of its track record in supporting the national broadcasters, and it is a track record built upon the recent budget and the triennial funding announcement.

The government will provide the ABC with $89.4 million in additional funding over the next three years to expand news and current affairs services and for digital delivery of ABC programs. The government is also providing the ABC with a loan of $90 million over three years so it can consolidate the majority of its Melbourne based operations at its Southbank site. This will allow the ABC to achieve operational savings while continuing to deliver high-quality broadcast content. In addition to new funding announced in the budget, the ABC will receive $2.5 billion over three years in ongoing base funding from 2013-14. That base funding is important.

The SBS will receive $20 million in new funding over the next triennium to build on the success of its digital initiatives and to continue to develop its programming and services to reflect and promote multicultural and Indigenous Australia. The new funding is in addition to the $158.1 million over five years provided as part of the 2012-13 budget to ensure that SBS remains a vibrant and dynamic national broadcaster.

Both the ABC and SBS will continue to be exempt from the efficiency dividend, and I will say more about that.

In the last triennial funding round in 2009, the Labor government provided the ABC with the largest increase in its operational base funding since 1983. I remember the ABC out lobbying too at that time and walking around the halls of parliament, and I also remember that I wrote a letter about that to the minister, lobbying on it. I was at that stage the only MP who had written a letter on it. Then I led the charge to make sure that all the other MPs did that as well, and that was across the parliament.

The funding provided in 2012-13 represented the most significant funding boost SBS has ever had. This is in stark contrast to the previous government, whose first budget stripped $55 million per year from the ABC's base funding, crippling the national broadcaster's ability to keep pace with the changing media environment.

Can I say that I get a bit tired of the whole debate about the ABC: 'Is it biased or is it not?' I am sure every MP in here has an experience and a view. I do get a bit fed up with that, particularly from the coalition. The honourable member for Wentworth is fond of asserting that the public broadcasters have no greater friend than him.

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Communications and Broadband) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I don't think I've said that, but it's probably a fair comment.

Janelle Saffin (Page, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The honourable member for Wentworth has said words to that effect. I was maybe putting it more eloquently than the honourable member might have. But it was only last week that the honourable member for Wentworth was refusing to rule out slashing the budgets of the national broadcasters under a coalition government. When it comes to the national broadcasters—

An honourable member interjecting—

yes, I tell you, yes—the coalition cannot be trusted. A friend would be saying: 'Funding won't be slashed. Funding is secure, and I agree to no efficiency dividend.'

But this new funding that I have talked about ensures that the ABC and SBS can continue to build on the extensive range of services they provide to their audiences, especially the growing demand for their innovative digital services. The national broadcasters provide a range of programs, news and information across television, radio and digital platforms accessed by millions of Australians every day. In a changing media environment they are more important than ever as a source of news and current affairs, local content and telling stories.

I have seen a quote from the honourable member for Wentworth, which reads as follows:

But if there is a broader austerity of some kind across the board then all departments may have to bear some of the pain.

I repeat: there is no efficiency dividend. My question is, Minister: would you like to— (Time expired)

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Firstly, I thank the member for Page for her contribution and for her ongoing support of ABC and SBS. I am not surprised that a regional member feels so strongly about the role that these fine national institutions play in our lives, making a huge difference whether it be through television, radio or new media opportunities that both of these institutions are engaged in.

With regard to the record funding for ABC and SBS, the government is proud of the support that we have given. It has also been given, might I say, from some other portfolios. My portfolio of infrastructure has, for example, assisted in building the new headquarters of the ABC in Brisbane. People would be aware of issues raised about the health of staff at the former ABC headquarters. The new structure stands on the banks of the Brisbane River.

I went to the opening of the Queensland Symphony Orchestra. The ABC does play that important cultural role in our cities and our regions. One thing that orchestra have been doing, as do other institutions associated with our public broadcasters, is bring cultural activities to regional communities. They certainly play a fine role there.

The government is absolutely committed to this funding. We are committed to the independence as well of the ABC and SBS, unlike the former government that stacked the boards with right-wing ideologues. We have ensured that there is a professionalism brought to the appointment of the boards and to those institutions.

In response to the shadow minister's questions that were raised, the issue of asbestos is indeed one that has haunted communities since the dangers of asbestos became clear. It must be said that the dangers were apparent to executives in companies such as James Hardie a long time before they were prepared to fess up to the consequences of this deadly product for which they were prepared to put profit before the lives of those people who worked with the product and those people who just lived in communities. Indeed, it is the case that where building work for infrastructure takes place in cities such as Sydney there needs to be absolute care to ensure that the workers are protected and also that communities are unaffected where this work is taking place.

I know that when a refurbishment of an oval in my electorate was taking place, they found a lot of asbestos had literally just been buried beneath the oval—covered over with dirt as if the problem would just go away. This is something that does need to be above politics. The member for Wentworth is clearly genuine in his concerns about these issues; these issues are serious but they are not new. We know that claims, for example, that legacy infrastructure with asbestos will not be disturbed under the coalition's plan is not true. That is why these claims are now being refuted by industry experts. We need to make sure that this work occurs in an appropriate way. There is no way to avoid interacting with asbestos when you are working on Australia's fixed telecommunications network. The member for Wentworth cannot avoid dealing with asbestos if he is ever in a position to build his fibre to the node system which would consist of some 70,000 nodes at least. As independent telecommunications consultant and safety expert Fernando Calero told the Financial Review:

…rolling out fibre-to-the-node technology still requires some modification of pits and pipes between Telstra exchanges and street corners, as well as those pipes connecting Telstra exchanges.

Mr Calero also said:

A lot of the inter-exchange stuff is asbestos. … Many of the main trunks are asbestos.

It is a fact that when this work takes place every care must be taken and Telstra has accepted responsibility for doing just that.

We know indeed that this is not a new issue. We know that in 2001 Telstra wanted to create an independent body to fast-track compensation payments to employees exposed to asbestos. They sought approval from the then Department of Workplace Relations, but they got knocked back. The then Minister for Workplace Relations was the current Leader of the Opposition. So, the opposition leader knew about those issues as far back as 2001, when Telstra made a clear approach to the department. In 2005 it was raised again. In September 2005 a question on notice was asked of Minister McGauran representing the then communications minister Senator Coonan about Telstra's use of asbestos. The minister provided an answer in February 2006 that explained Telstra's use of asbestos in pits, ducts and exchanges and the possibility of exposure. This has been an issue that has been around for a long time. This is an issue that requires every care.

I had the great honour of being a patron of the Asbestos Diseases Foundation prior to being elected as a member of the House of Representatives and afterwards as a backbench member through my association with Barry Robson, a great Australian, and the great Bernie Banton—as heroic an Australian as anyone could meet. He was courageous until the end, fighting and campaigning not for himself but for justice for other Australians. I believe that we need to ensure that every respect is given to people such as Bernie Banton for the role he has played in fighting companies that did hid what they were doing—companies like James Hardie and CSR, which some prominent people on the opposite side see fit to defend in cases against victims of asbestos. I have found some of the politicking in the last week or so a bit galling, frankly, given the history of these issues. Of these issues, I would say that Telstra—just like any other company or organisation engaged in activity that is likely to disturb asbestos—needs to take every care possible.

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Communications and Broadband) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very disappointed that despite my generosity in encouraging the minister to speak for twice as long, he was unable to answer the question—nor would the minister for workplace relations answer it. The question was this: is the government saying that undisturbed, intact, non-friable asbestos-containing material should not be left in situ—as is the practice at Telstra; as indeed is contemplated in the national codes—but rather should be proactively removed, notwithstanding that this carries, as the national code I read from earlier, risks of contamination?

This is a very serious point. That is why I said at the outset that I do not want to have a slanging match with the minister opposite. I do not want to get into ancient history. I want to get some clarity on this very important point. I will leave that with the minister. I would just respond to the honourable member from the north coast.

Honourable Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

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

We are here to consider the expenditure of the relevant department.

Honourable members interjecting—

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Communications and Broadband) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

All right. I should have called a point of order. I have no right to reply there; fair enough. I now want to turn to the rollout of the NBN. I want to ask the minister whether he is concerned and what he is going to do about the failure of the NBN to meet its rollout targets. It was originally forecast, in late 2010, to pass 950,000 brownfield premises by 30 June this year. In August 2012 that was scaled back to 286,000 premises—a massive reduction. As of the end of March, that was scaled back again to somewhere between 155,000 and 175,000 premises to be passed. As of mid May, so we have been told, they have only passed just over 70,000 premises.

The big issue here is whether there is a flaw in the construction model and whether this project is genuinely scalable in the manner contemplated in the corporate plan. We are being told directly—through the media and elsewhere—that contractors are not making a living out of this work. I was talking to a contractor today who said to me that his rate to excavate, remove and dispose of a Telstra pit made of asbestos-containing material was $78. He said he cannot make a living out of that. He said his rate for putting in a new, large, plastic pit and setting it all up—buying the pit, labour, materials and everything else—was $295. This is a very relevant issue. Is the reason the project is running so slowly the fact that the contractors are not making a quid out of it?

The challenge is that at the moment the NBN Co. is passing 353 houses a working day, in this half year. That is the current rate. They should have been passing over a thousand. Their plan calls for them next year to be passing 10 times that number. Every time the NBN Co. has missed a target—and this is a fact, this is not conjecture—it asserts that the ramp-up is going to be even steeper. I ask the minister whether the government is satisfied with the rollout so far and what measures he believes the government and the NBN Co. should take to enable it to get closer to meeting the targets in its corporate plan?

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Can I say that the most certain way of slowing the progress of the NBN would be to stop building it. That is what those opposite have in mind with their inferior, slower, alternative plan that is not of course the NBN. They have realised that the NBN is quite popular, so they are now pretending that they are going to keep it. It will cost just about as much, but for a far inferior product in which they have acknowledged would need to be upgraded before they have even started. I think it is right to actually get the infrastructure right first-up. If this mob were in charge of the Sydney Harbour Bridge it would have had one lane both ways. It is absurd.

From time to time the member for Wentworth says it is going too slow, but this week his Senate leader, the esteemed Senator Abetz, had this to say on 3 June:

… the reason that these talks need to be held is that there has been this indecent haste with the rollout of NBN.

It is going too slow, according to the member for Wentworth, but his Senate leader says it is going too fast. The fact is the rollout of the NBN is happening in every state and territory across the country. So far this year new areas switched on include Gungahlin, Toowoomba, Coffs Harbour, Bacchus Marsh, Hobart, Gosford, Blacktown and Townsville. There are well over 50,000 NBN services live across Australia, providing enhanced broadband to homes, businesses and schools, and NBN's take-up rates are world records. We also have fixed wireless NBN services being provided from 69 sites, including Ballarat, Darwin, Geraldton, Toowoomba, Tamworth and many other areas. Construction has commenced at over 115 additional sites and, overall, more than 770 sites have received planning approvals.

This is a project which common sense tells you, as it ramps-up, it is possible to do it faster and faster. It is logical that the initial stages of the rollout of the NBN would be slower than the middle stages and the middle stages would be slower than the final stages. That is the way that infrastructure happens. Whether it be the NBN or the building of a road or a new rail line. If you look at the regional rail network in Victoria, which is in my portfolio, you will see that we are now expending over $100 million every month on what is the largest infrastructure commitment to public transport that any Australian government has given to any project. It ramps-up with huge benefits for Melbourne but also, importantly, for Bendigo, Ballarat and Geelong. We on this side of the House understand infrastructure and the way that it develops. We understand that you need to get it right the first time. We understand that you need to be committed to put that investment in and that you get a return on that investment. Indeed, the NBN will deliver a return, not just an economic return but a social return as well because of the benefits it will bring to the provision of education and health services, because of the opportunity that will be created, particularly in regional Australia, at overcoming the tyranny of distance that has been a disadvantage for people in regional Australia, compared with their counterparts in CBD electorates, or the distance of Australia from the rest of the world. This is a very important project. The rollout is proceeding. The only threat to the rollout is the failure to re-elect the Labor government in September.

Laura Smyth (La Trobe, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very pleased to be able to make some inquiries this afternoon about the broadband, communications and digital economy portfolio. I certainly commend the very fine work that is being done by both the minister here today and his colleague in the other place in relation to the rollout and the governance of the NBN. I know that it is met with very sincere enthusiasm in the part of the world that I represent. Indeed, one of the universities that is in my electorate has already talked to me about ways in which they might be able to take the opportunity advanced by the NBN to develop some telehealth, some medical applications, for the NBN and to pursue opportunities there in conjunction with other organisations. It is very welcome in educational institutions. I know that it is certainly welcome by small businesses and large businesses alike and, indeed, by residents in my part of the world.

NBN Co. is set to roll out fairly soon in Boronia and in and around the basin, at the northern end of my electorate and, at the same time, in the greenfield sites in the southern end of my electorate—the growth corridor. It is being very well received and there is much anticipation of the rollout in those areas, as there is across the Dandenong Ranges. Residents regularly report to me about the unreliability of the copper network. They appreciate all too readily its flaws. I know that the member for Wentworth would be aware of this, because he has been in my part of the world with the former member for La Trobe in recent weeks, admittedly to a fairly select audience there, but he certainly did come along. So I am sure he is familiar with the interest in the NBN's roll out to homes and businesses—not to somewhere down the street but right to people's doors. This is so that they can use the NBN for the transformative purpose that it was intended to have, such as for social use by people who might be isolated in the more remote parts of my electorate. It will be very beneficial for not only a lot of elderly residents who have taken an interest in our Broadband for Seniors program but, needless to say, also business applications.

I was recently at a forum which the Emerald small business group held with the Assistant Treasurer. I can certainly say that there was much interest in the NBN's application for business, particularly in that part of my electorate which is effectively on the urban rural fringe of Melbourne. I guess you might call it a peri-urban area. For people who may have to travel quite long distances to transact business, when the NBN is rolled out to that area it will be extremely beneficial, and there was much interest in it. Likewise, I have mentioned medical use and, of course, educational use for the NBN. Clearly, a great deal of work has been done right across government, not simply in this portfolio but in the health portfolio and the education portfolio to establish the NBN and to contemplate its applications immediately as it rolls out and into the future.

In light of this, I am particularly interested to ask about one transformative way in which the NBN might be best used by businesses, small and large, and that is in the context of cloud computing. Business operators are certainly acutely aware of the benefits that are presented to them by cloud computing, which enables them to have the potential to access quite powerful IT infrastructure without necessarily having to own it and operate it on site. It is a flexible means by which businesses and others can gain the benefits of the NBN network.

Today's internet, as all of us know, increasingly involves two-way communications through an interactive environment. Regrettably, those opposite routinely forget about the importance of upload speeds or upload capacity. Happily, we have not forgotten that. We are alive to it in the context of cloud computing. It is really unfortunate that those opposite have not seen the potential for cloud computing to advance business or the NBN as a means to advance business—those whom they purport so regularly to speak on behalf of.

My question today in light of all of this and in light of my evidently keen interest in the NBN is: are there particular ways through the budget and otherwise that the minister can advise about that the application of cloud computing and how it can be advanced by the NBN?

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for La Trobe for her ongoing interest in the NBN and her conveying of the interest of her local business community. I of course have had the pleasure of visiting the fine electorate of La Trobe, including to a community cabinet meeting where we had discussions with local business leaders about the capacity for the NBN to allow an area which is on the urban fringes of the great city of Melbourne to engage and compete in real time and not have to be located in the CBD. That has other advantages as well in terms of transport and transforming the lifestyles of people who live in such a magnificent electorate, which has lots of open space and a lot of attractiveness to it. The areas on the outskirts of our cities have had the disadvantage of distance, and one of the things that the NBN does is make it very possible for businesses to locate and compete in a real sense, because the physical location is not as important and, of course, there are all the applications that the member speaks about, particularly in terms of medical technology.

It is indeed a tragedy that in some of the debate from those opposite they have comprehensively failed to understand the importance of upload speeds and the importance of transformative technologies like Cloud computing. The sorts of comments that you see from time to time about the NBN just being about downloading movies faster than is possible in other areas is an example of that. I genuinely felt a great deal of sympathy for the member for Wentworth when he was standing in Fox Studios and the Sonny Bill Williams image appeared and there was the Leader of the Opposition saying, 'That is computer generated, isn't it?' as if he had woken up to the fact that he had not just appeared in Fox Studios as an apparition as a result of some sort of Dr Who TARDIS type system. That says a lot about their failure to understand why this transformative policy is so important.

It will also revolutionise access to the Cloud. We are no longer living in a broadcast world. Today's internet is increasingly a two-way, thoroughly interactive environment. Cloud computing facilitates this new world by enabling access to powerful IT infrastructure without the need to own and operate it on site. Unlike those opposite, we are getting on with the job of building broadcast infrastructure to support technologies like Cloud for all Australians and the potential of this technology into the future.

For someone with a 12-year-old who is much more technologically competent than his father—and that is a familiar experience—opening up the world to young people means that part of what the NBN debate is about is embracing the future and not being scared or intimidated by it. It is about embracing the opportunities that it will bring. It is a democratic mechanism, which is very important in terms of participation in that two-way interactive environment of the future. So I thank the member for La Trobe, and I certainly look forward to the opportunities of the future as facilitated by the rollout of the NBN.

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Communications and Broadband) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister in his day job, of course, is the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport and is responsible for Infrastructure Australia. I want to ask him whether he regrets the government breaking its election pledge in 2007 to refer any major infrastructure investment by the Commonwealth to Infrastructure Australia for a rigorous cost-benefit analysis. This, of course, was not the case with the NBN, the largest infrastructure project in our history, where no such analysis, no such homework, was done.

I draw the minister's attention to his attempt to compare the rollout of the NBN with a road. He gives the impression that he is more familiar with roads than he is with telecom networks. But the point is not that the rollout is slower at the beginning than it is at the middle and the end; the point is that the rollout is so far behind the NBN Co.'s own corporate plan. It is the NBN not failing anybody else's standards but failing its own standards. In that context, I want to draw his attention to a report today in The Australian Financial Review which sets out, as has been acknowledged by the NBN Co., that not only are they going to miss their rollout figures for the fixed line fibre-to-the-premise network in brownfield sites by a very large margin, as I mentioned earlier, but they are also going to miss by a very large margin, around 50 per cent, the target for fixed wireless, which is the technology to be used for four per cent of the overall footprint.

I want to see what the minister's view is on the NBN Co.'s explanation for this. The NBN Co.'s chief executive said to a Senate committee last week that the problem with the wireless rollout was due to large trees. I wonder if the minister could reflect on whether a cost-benefit analysis would have identified the fact that in regional Australia there are quite a lot of trees, large and small. It does seem curious that the presence of trees, large trees, would come as a shock to the NBN Co. and that it had not been anticipated. The other reason to which the chief executive of the NBN Co. attributed this huge failure to meet their target was inaccurate address information, which I gather means that they could not find their customers. This seems to be an extraordinary failure, and I wonder whether the minister's normal cheerful equanimity will be disturbed by the revelation that the NBN Co. failed to anticipate that there were large trees in Australia, some or all of them containing koalas, no doubt, and that the NBN Co., in addition to that, has failed to be able to find its customers.

Government Member:

A government member interjecting—

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Communications and Broadband) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The honourable member says it is rubbish. I am just quoting what they have said.

The other matter that he might turn his mind to is this point. I seek to get his views on this question of asbestos and fibre to the node by just drawing to his attention the fact that the whole point of a fibre-to-the-node rollout, the justification for it, is that it involves much less civil works. The minister would know that 80 per cent of the cost of a telecom rollout, if not more, is in the civil works. The electronics and the cables are actually a relatively small part of it, even though they are the most obviously ingenious and brilliant. So, by definition, a fibre-to-the-node rollout, while it does not exclude exposure to asbestos-containing materials entirely—and no-one has suggested that it does, least of all me—does of necessity mean that the infrastructure between the street cabinet and the customer's premise is not being disturbed in the way it is with a fibre-to-the-premise rollout. That is why there is not the need to dig up and replace millions of Telstra pits and thousands of kilometres of Telstra ducts and pipes. I just want to draw that to the minister's attention and see if that would cause him to review his opinion.

Michelle Rowland (Greenway, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would also like to ask the minister about the National Broadband Network and how, under Labor's National Broadband Network every home and business will be able to connect to the NBN by 2021, and some areas sooner than others such as mine and the member for Chifley's. I understand that 11.8 million premises will be directly connect by fibre.

I also note that the coalition has a document which proposes to connect only 2.8 million premises directly to fibre, mostly premises in new developments, and that will mean that there will be nine million Australian households and businesses that would disconnected from Labor's NBN unless they pay up to $5,000 for it, leading to some quite perverse results, including, as I know you are aware, minister, and reported in the Blacktown Advocate on 22 April that:

Blacktown will become a city of broadband haves and have nots under the coalition's watered-down version of the National Broadband Network.

I also note that National Party policy 2012-13 states as follows:

The Nationals' policy is to place a priority on rolling out fibre optic cable to the majority of consumers in regional Australia first.

The NBN, as I know you are aware, minister, will deliver fibre to the home to 70 per cent of regional premises, which I know the member for Page would be very interested in as well. I note that the Nationals' Senator Joyce said in 2009 that the National Broadband Network is 'truly the Nationals' broadband network' as it has been 'lifted', according to Senator Joyce, straight from the Page Research Centre's position paper in 2005 into telecommunications. The senator said, 'How could we disagree with something that is quite evidently our idea?'

As you may be aware, minister, the National Party appears to have rejected that now think that regional Australia can make do with a fibre-to-the-node model. I also draw attention to the coalition's document which states that nine million premises will be served what former senator Nick Minchin described in 2009 as 75,000 'large equipment cabinets' similar in size to large refrigerators connected to mains power, including fans or air conditioners. I did not say this, the then Senator Minchin said: 'I do not think anybody would really want one of these large cabinets outside their home'.

Minister, you may also have seen and been aware of what Senator Nash has said about the coalition's plan and what it would mean for regional Australia. In 2007 she said:

The people of rural and regional Australia know a furphy when they see one. It is widely understood in the telecommunications industry that FTTN will not deliver improved broadband speeds for rural and regional areas.

The senator also said about fibre to the node, 'It is a furphy. It is fraudulent.'. Senator Nash said:

In spruiking their flawed fibre-to-the-node plan Labor are doing one of two things: they are either deluding themselves and at the same time the Australian public if they think FTTN will deliver high-speed broadband to rural and regional areas, or they are being deliberately deceitful and are trying to trick the public into supporting a plan they know is flawed.

I also note Senator Boswell said: 'Fibre to the node just will not work in rural and regional Australia'. And while on the subject of rural and regional Australia, as an aside, minister, you may also be aware of the principle in Labor's NBN of wholesale equivalent of pricing, whereas the alternative document proposes to get rid of this and exacerbate the digital divide not only on accessibility but also affordability as between regional and metropolitan areas. I also note former BT CTO Peter Cochrane said, 'fibre to the cabinet is one of the biggest mistakes humanity has made'.

As I said in parliament yesterday, statistics have shown that Labor's NBN, prior to the coalition releasing its alternative, had the support of 73 per cent of Australians. That figure actually went up afterwards to be 78 per cent support from people compared to the alternative. So my question, minister, is: what are the benefits of rolling out fibre to 11.8 million homes and businesses in Australia?

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the members for their contributions. Firstly, to the member for Wentworth who mentioned Infrastructure Australia. Infrastructure Australia was established very proudly by this government. When they produced their first report to COAG in May 2009, they identified progress moving forward of what would be required to truly develop economic productivity through nation-building infrastructure. Table 2 identifies infrastructure priorities under seven themes. Theme 1 is a National Broadband Network.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

they then went on to speak about developing a more extensive, accessible and globally competitive broadband system. 'Infrastructure Australia supports an investment from the Building Australia Fund to develop the National Broadband Network.' This mob opposite have gone around and promised funding for infrastructure projects on the back of an envelope before there is any analysis whatsoever—

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Communications and Broadband) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As opposed to the back of a beer coaster.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the House) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As opposed to the Infrastructure Australia system whereby 15 out of 15 projects have been funded, including four projects in the last budget that we are dealing with in these appropriations for additional projects—two of which, the Melbourne metro project and the cross river rail project, in spite of Infrastructure Australia's recommendations and support, and in spite of the fact that negotiations had concluded with both the respective state governments. Under pressure from the federal opposition, they have walked away from this. In Brisbane we know, as a result of the state government failing to support its own proposal for the cross river rail project, they are now proposing that they will rip out the seats from the trains so people will have to stand up on the trains. That is the alternative infrastructure vision of those opposite.

I am asked by the member for Greenway about a range of issues with regard to the digital divide. The great advantage of the NBN is overcoming regional disadvantage and disadvantage between people who live in different parts of our capital cities. What the NBN has done in places like Blacktown, where it has been rolled out in the electorates of Greenway and Chifley, is provide economic opportunity. If those opposite have their way, as has been identified, some people in the community will have the NBN and some people will not. They will have a second-rate system. That is of enormous regret.

What is extraordinary is the National Party rolling over on the issue of wholesale pricing equivalent—a principle which says that whether you live in Burnie, Ballarat, Marrickville or Vaucluse, you pay the same amount which is something that is absolutely essential to equity in the system. Those opposite have not done that. I note that it was a National Party member who came up with 'fraudband'. I say very clearly that the shadow minister for 'fraudband' and the copper economy should be embarrassed by his party's position, because to have fibre to some and copper to others after it goes through what the member for Wentworth says is a bar fridge on the corner of particular streets is just extraordinary. He acknowledges it is essentially a fridge-like large structure which will appear all over the suburbs. Every single one of those fridges will be a symbol of the backward nature of those who want to keep us in the copper age rather than the fibre age.

Proposed expenditure agreed to.

Regional Australia, Local Government, Arts and Sport

Proposed expenditure, $1,623,492,000

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Regional Services, Local Communities and Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The 2013-14 budget continues the government's strong investment in regional Australia and its commitment to working in partnership with regional economies in transition and to helping develop creative solutions to those regions—to support better economic, social and environmental outcomes across all of those regional communities. This budget invests record amounts in community-driven investment. In the budget we have built on our existing commitment to regional Australia, through the Regional Development Australia Fund, to finance very important infrastructure projects that address the specific economic and community needs of all of our regions.

From the first two rounds, we have invested some $350 million to leverage projects already worth $1.2 billion across the community. Already 75 projects are under way ensuring people living in rural and regional Australia are getting the services and support that they need, supporting the improvement and construction of regional infrastructure, community sporting and youth associations and cultural projects across regional Australian communities.

We have been strengthening governance, improving infrastructure and supporting economic development in Australia's Indian Ocean territories, committing to Norfolk Island reform, meeting the operating deficit of the Norfolk Island government but at the same time strengthening governance and improving services for the benefit of the island's economy and its residents, particularly in the area of apprenticeships and child protection. They are two very important areas of the island and are in desperate need. We have also been extending the operation of the Reconstruction Inspectorate and the National Disaster Recovery Taskforce to ensure that every cent of our flood-rebuilding package goes where it is needed and helps flood-affected communities to rebuild their roads, bridges, rail lines and public facilities so that they can get their lives back on track.

In the budget we are also contributing to the future economic development of North Queensland and supporting activities that enhance Indigenous and community engagement to facilitate the opportunities that are available under the Australia in the Asian century white paper. It is important also as part of this budget that we recognise the important role that local government plays across this country. The budget includes funding, as we have been debating, to conduct a referendum on the financial recognition of local government in the Australian constitution. That referendum will be held on the same date as the 2013 election and $10 million has been funded for a national civics campaign and education campaign, which is to provide information to the general public about the referendum. It is some time since we have had a referendum. There are generations of kids who have not had exposure to what that means and they will be voting for the first time, so the civics education campaign is very important.

The 2013 budget also includes a $25 million package to create jobs and encourage a generation of arts and creative businesses. The minister here will talk a little more about that. There is also additional funding being provided in the sports portfolio. We want to continue the very successful, Active After-school Communities program. It is a terrific program that has been doing great work in small and large schools across the country. The program is extended for one calendar year until December 2014. The program also supports around 2,000 primary schools and 1,200 out-of-school care services to provide quality sport programs.

The budget also increases the intelligence, investigative and results-management capabilities of the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority and it enhances the National Integrity of Sport Unit's ability to assess and respond to information about drugs and corruption in sport. Our commitment in this budget to regional Australia and its long-term economic and social sustainability is strong. It is something that members on this side of the House have felt very passionately about for a long time and I am very pleased that in this budget we continue that commitment to regional Australia. The portfolio continues to look forward to strengthening those relationships across Australia, particularly through our involvement with regional development through our RDA network; local government, importantly, to get those linkages between the RDA network and local government right; services to the territories; and arts and sport—that is part of our portfolio—to drive even stronger regional growth and a more sustainable nation to capitalise in particular on the opportunities of the Asian century. I welcome questions.

Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a pity the Minister for Regional Development and Local Government is not with us; otherwise, I would be referring the minister to program 1.1 of his department's PBS and asking the minister to explain where this funding, which is supposed to be for regional Australia, is being spent. Does the minister agree with his predecessor that regional Australia is all of Australia? Is the minister aware of the definition of 'regional Australia' used by the Australian Bureau of Statistics? Does his department use this definition when meeting the objectives listed under program 1.1? How did the minister's department come to define 'regional Australia' as it does; was it a ministerial decision? Will the minister confirm that the largest regional infrastructure project that Labor has funded is the $480 million investment in roads around Perth Airport? Last time I checked, Perth was a capital city. So does the minister consider Perth to be part of regional Australia?

I refer the minister to the Sydney Multicultural Arts and Sports Precinct that has just been funded under round 4 of the Regional Development Australia Fund. Does the minister consider Sydney to be part of regional Australia? I refer the minister to Melbourne's Western Indoor Sports Hub, the WISH project precinct, which has been funded under round 4 of the Regional Development Australia Fund. Does the minister consider Western Melbourne to be part of regional Australia?

I ask the minister to explain why the Gillard government has given preferential treatment to projects proposed in Western Sydney, allowing 20 projects to proceed to full application status in the RDA Fund, whereas every other region was only permitted to submit their top three projects. Will the minister justify for the benefit of the House why the Gillard government broke promises made to regional Australia when they formed government and why, in the last three years, they have reduced spending on regional Australia? How can the minister now defend Labor's Regional Development Australia Fund, which actually spends $90 million per year less than the regional fund it replaced, the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program?

I refer the minister to the objective of his department listed on page 36 of the portfolio budget statement:

… drives regional policy to improve social, economic and environmental outcomes for regional Australians.

I ask the minister: how does the government's carbon tax improve the social, economic and environmental outcomes for regional Australians? Does the minister agree that the Gillard government's carbon tax will drive up the cost of living for regional Australians without saving the environment? Minister, given regional Australia will suffer the greatest impact because most of our power generation, mining and manufacturing sectors reside in regional Australia, will you advise the House what actions your department will take to drive regional policy? Given Australians in regional New South Wales spent 25 per cent more on electricity than those in Sydney, and Australians in regional Victoria spent 30 per cent more than those in Melbourne—

Government Members:

Government members interjecting—

Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

what steps will the minister take to drive social, economic and environmental regional policy?

Government members interjecting—

Minister, your answer should be 'scrapping the carbon tax', because the carbon tax is bad for regional Australia. As I say—

Government members interjecting—

Madam Deputy Speaker O'Neill, I cannot believe that you are allowing this level of interruption and—

Deborah O'Neill (Robertson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I sensed you were about to complete your questioning—

Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ask you to take control of the House. It is obvious that these members opposite—

Deborah O'Neill (Robertson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order, Member for Patterson!

Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

have got an awful lot to hide.

Deborah O'Neill (Robertson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Paterson will return to his questions.

Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am, Madam Deputy Speaker. The whole issue here is regional Australia. Why is all of Australia considered regional Australia? Why aren't regional Australia funds just for regional areas? Why are the capital cities included in regional Australia funding? Weren't you smart enough to develop an urban development fund and a regional fund? Because what you are doing is taking money out of the bush and putting it directly back into the city.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Regional Services, Local Communities and Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very happy to respond to the questions. Many of the responsibilities that you just asked about—

Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Where's the minister?

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

She is the minister!

Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am talking about a cabinet minister.

Deborah O'Neill (Robertson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Paterson, you are being responded to by the minister.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Regional Services, Local Communities and Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am hoping that that is not sexism operating there in terms of my ministerial responsibilities! But that is okay.

Bob Baldwin (Paterson, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On a point of order, Madam Deputy Speaker: I ask the minister to withdraw that comment calling me sexist.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Regional Services, Local Communities and Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am happy to facilitate the ongoing debate about this by withdrawing that comment. As the minister responsible for many of the issues you have raised, I am very happy to discuss them. I am really disappointed that the shadow minister for this area does not seem to understand what regional development is about. There are many people—like me, like the member opposite and like the many regional members who have come here today—who live in what are classified as regional or provincial cities. But that is not the sole definition of regional development. It never has been. It has not been the sole definition across the entire history of academic work in regional development. There are regions in capital cities, there are regions in outer metropolitan areas, there are regions in and around provincial cities and there are regions in and around rural towns. The RDA network we have developed was in fact based on the previous government's area consultative committee councils. Are you telling me that you had no area consultative committee councils in city areas?

Deborah O'Neill (Robertson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister will direct her remarks through the chair.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Regional Services, Local Communities and Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My apologies, Deputy Speaker. Is the shadow member saying that there were no area consultative committees in city areas? I have a recollection that there were five area consultative committees covering the area of Melbourne and that they put in applications under the Regional Partnerships programs—and, I think, were successful. I have a vague recollection too of an inner Sydney area getting support under the Regional Partnerships program—for a project on a beach.

I cannot believe that the shadow minister, who is purporting to be the developer of regional development policy for the opposition, does not seem to understand regional development. Let me go to one particular project announced out of round 4 of the Regional Development Australia Fund which was raised by the shadow minister—the project in Werribee. I do not know whether you have ever visited Werribee, but let me suggest to you that you might want to do that. When I was in Werribee with the Prime Minister announcing that RDAF round 4 project, I was delighted to meet the lovely mayor, Heather, who is from there. She was originally born in my electorate in Trawalla, where Jim Scullin was born—I am very proud to have that association. She talked about how Werribee was a town of 8,000 people when she first moved there. It is, and was always viewed as, a country town. My sister moved there 20 years ago. It is a tiny country town. It has faced enormous population growth, which is terrific.

Opposition members interjecting—

I am glad that you have been there. So you know that Werribee is a country town which has faced enormous pressure from population growth exploding out of Melbourne. The community had a tiny basketball stadium which was servicing a huge population. The opportunity to make that a regional sporting facility, a centre for basketball for the west of Victoria, is a terrific opportunity.

Again I say to the shadow minister: you clearly do not understand regional development. It is not just about regional provincial cities; it is also about regions and regional areas that cover a whole raft of areas. I know, having been in this area for a while, that the shadow minister is committed to making sure that we have good policy across our regions. I remind the shadow minister that, under the Regional Partnerships program, you did fund a whole raft of projects—some of which were successful and some of which were questionable, to be quite honest, particularly those in the private sector—and perhaps you might want to reflect on that when you ask a question. (Time expired)

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This budget includes a $235 million package to drive the implementation of Creative Australia—the National Cultural Policy. Creative Australia aims to ensure that the cultural sector, incorporating all aspects of the arts, heritage and the creative industries, has the skills, resources and resilience to play an active role in Australia's future. I want to pay tribute to my predecessor in the portfolio, the member for Hotham, for the work that he did in putting together Creative Australia.

Additional funding has been provided to the arts portfolio to ensure that the Australia Council can meet the challenges of a rapidly evolving artistic practice through provision of $75.3 million in new funding, including $15 per annum in additional funding for arts organisations to address unfunded excellence; $1.25 million per annum in funding to harness excellence in the major performing arts companies; $1 million per annum for training and development to build the professional capacity of the arts sector; $1 million per annum to develop and implement a detailed and systematic data collection program; establish a new funding program for the newly formed Creative Partnerships Australia at a cost of $8.6 million over two years; continuing training available to students through our elite arts training organisations through a provision of $20.8 million over four years; establish the arts ready program to address skills through targeted on-the-job training at a cost of $3.4 million over four years; provide $9.3 million over four years to six major performing arts companies to ensure they can continue to tell innovative and uniquely Australian stories; extend the existing Indigenous Languages Support program and enable funding to language projects based in the Torres Strait by providing an additional $14 million over four years; provide $11.3 million over four years to continue the successful Indigenous Visual Arts Industry Support program; continue the ArtStart program to assist recent arts graduates to grow their professional practice into a sustainable business at a cost of $9.7 million over four years; establish a digital content fund supporting Australian digital production at a cost of $10 million over four years; and ensure a one-off $20 million location incentive to increase Australia's competitiveness as a world-class filming destination.

As part of the $235 million package, funding was also provided through other portfolios to ensure $40 million in funding for cultural infrastructure, as parts of rounds 3 and 4 of the Regional Australia Development Fund, to continue the Australian Music Radio Airplay Project and to assist community groups that operate self-help radio retransmission facilities in regional and remote areas at a cost of $5.1 million over four years; provide $8 million over two years to establish the Creative Young Stars program to encourage, support and celebrate creative, cultural, academic and community achievement.

We are very proud to release Creative Australia and believe it provides a strong strategic framework for government investment in the arts, cultural heritage and creative industries, establishing a solid base for future growth and improved sustainability in the sector. The portfolio looks forward to implementing Creative Australia over the next 10 years.

Justine Elliot (Richmond, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As a regional member, I am very pleased to be participating tonight. I certainly have some questions for the minister for regional services later in relation to some of the government's massive investment right throughout regional Australia.

When I look at my electorate, I see more than $1.5 billion of major investment in community infrastructure in a regional area, in roads, in health facilities and in community facilities. It has made a really big difference to my area. This budget commits almost $1 billion through the Regional Development Australia Fund, to finance infrastructure projects throughout the nation. I am very proud that we have delivered so much.

I am really excited tonight to be talking about the $500,000 from the RDAF for the Knox Park youth precinct at Murwillumbah. This is funded by the Tweed Shire Council, which is matching the federal Labor government's commitment of $500,000. It is a fantastic investment and the project will deliver a range of recreational facilities for a whole range of age groups including an adventure playground and a plaza style skate park. This particular park has needed to be upgraded for a long period of time. We were very proud to make the announcement. It is going to make a very big difference to that area. This is what RDAF funding does; it really makes a huge investment in regional areas and delivers great results.

I was also really pleased only a couple of weeks ago on 21 May when the minister for regional development was in my area and we turned the sod at the Arkinstall Park Sports Centre at Tweed heads. That received $5 million from in the previous round of RDAF funding. It is a great investment in our area. That is to complete and do some major upgrades on our netball and tennis courts. When it is completed we will have an international-style facility for tennis and netball which we can be really proud of.

It will also be a great training facility, with the Commonwealth Games just up the road at the Gold Coast in 2018. If they are looking for some training they can just come over the border to Tweed Heads and we will have that wonderful sporting facility there which will make a huge difference. Really importantly, it is going to make a very big difference to our region. Our kids will be able to use international-style sporting facilities, which is so important. Of course, the economic benefits from all these projects just go on and on. There are so many.

I do not have the time to talk about all the funding in my electorate when it comes to regional development but, previously, under the other programs, there was $9.5 million for the sport and recreation centre at Byron Bay; $2.7 million for the cultural and community centre at Lennox Head; and $2 million for the community centre at Murwillumbah. That all came out of the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program—our previous regional development program—and that has made a massive difference to the community as well.

I also want to touch on the incredible upgrades to the Pacific Highway that we have had in my area which have made a big difference to our region. There was $359 million for the upgrade of the Pacific Highway at Sexton Hill and more than $500 million for the Pacific Highway upgrade between Tintenbar and Ewingsdale. Of course, we have also had the BER—another great investment. There was $115 million worth of upgrades to 90 local schools. What a difference that has made to our kids and what they can access in terms of their educational opportunities?

Also, there was $7 million for our GP superclinic at Tweed Heads, which opened its doors last Friday—a great, great achievement—and $1.8 million for the Jack Evans Boat Harbour redevelopment. Finally—we have another very important one--$2 million from this government was delivered for Australia's first high-performance surfing centre at Casuarina. We actually have the world's only high-performance centre or surfing—a great institute at Casuarina, just near Kingscliff. We have a lot of surfing greats that will come there and provide a mentoring service for young people. We are very proud to have the world's first. It truly remarkable.

That all adds up to more than $1.5 billion—a remarkable investment my electorate of Richmond. What you see from this government is real investment in real projects right throughout regional Australia and right across the board, whether it is roads, health facilities or community infrastructure. I have seen firsthand the benefits of all these facilities and the difference that they make. I would certainly like to hear a bit more from the minister, and I would like the Minister for Regional Services and Local Communities and Territories to outline the importance of this government's support for regional Australia—particularly touching on our Regional Development Australia Fund and the difference that it makes local communities like mine.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Regional Services, Local Communities and Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for highlighting the project in her electorate recently funded under RDAF 3. Regional Development Australia Fund round 3 has been a very successful round. We took the opportunity after each round to review, to listen to stakeholders and to go out and talk to the RDA network about what was happening with that round. One of the things that we were fed back was that often it was difficult for small communities and small towns to compete against larger councils. So that round was specifically designed for towns under 30,000. I was really delighted to see that round fund some 79 projects right the way across the country and in some communities that are very disadvantaged and which would not previously have had the opportunity to apply for that funding of up to $500,000—many applications were smaller than that—and make a substantial difference across each of those rounds.

The member has also highlighted that this government's commitment to regional Australia is not just about RDAF. I know people often want to focus on that particular program, but it has been across all areas of government. There has been significant investment through the Building the Education Revolution, primarily focused on schools. A large proportion of that money has gone to schools in regional, rural and remote Australia, providing opportunities for small communities that have never, for example, had access to libraries before—because those facilities are opened up to community members. The BER provided libraries, electronic whiteboards, meeting spaces and sporting infrastructure for small regional and small rural communities across the country.

Our investment in health included the Regional Cancer Centres. There has been significant investment by this government in improving the terrible divide that occurs in this country between city people who are diagnosed with cancer and people who live in regional and rural Australia who are diagnosed with cancer.

We know the health outcomes and survival rates of people diagnosed with cancer in regional and rural Australia are some five years behind their metropolitan counterparts. We know that is not good enough. When you look across health, whether it is through GP super clinics, hospitals and health funds, which have seen investments in major health projects across the country but particularly in regional areas, right the way through to the regional integrated, that is very important and this government is very proud of them.

I also want to touch on the government's education reforms which we saw pass the House recently. Again I reiterate how incredibly important those reforms are because of the loading on the basis of size and locational disadvantage and what that means for regional students. I cannot overemphasise how critical that investment is to regional Australia. I think that the New South Wales National Party minister absolutely gets it. It is not something we often admit to but I know many regional MPs on this side of the House are very fond of members of the National Party. We share a lot in common in terms of the seats we represent. We do not often say that. I know many National Party members are of good heart and understand that the education reforms are a significant advantage to regional Australians and to many regional and rural schools.

I hope sense prevails across the country and that National Party members are listened to. In New South Wales, the National Party education minister absolutely gets it. This is critical. Our students in regional Australia are going to be left behind if we do not deal with this issue, if we do not put serious investment into our education system and increase funding on the basis of location and size. It is absolutely critical that we do so. The bills have now passed the House of Representatives. I certainly hope they pass the other place. What I absolutely hope is that the politics we have seen played out across the country is put aside—about not wanting, in someone's political spin doctoring mind, to give the government an advantage if Gonski gets through, that we cannot possibly allow them a win. I hope that sort of commentary, which we are seeing from Liberal and National Party coalition governments in some states, is put aside and that we see increases in funding to regional students. There are some $6 billion that regional and rural schools will benefit from; under the opposition's policy $16 billion will be cut. I hope the Nationals see sense on this.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would be prepared to give the minister an extension of time if she is going to continue to praise the National Party. I congratulate the member for Ballarat for her rise on 25 March to be Minister for Regional Services and Local Communities and Territories. I am sure she will do a good job. I also acknowledge the fact that the member for Eden Monaro on 4 February was appointed Minister for Defence Materiel. It is good that Labor is finally recognising that they should have ministers from the bush, from rural Australia. Correct me if I am wrong here; howl me down if you will.

Honourable Member:

Honourable member interjecting—

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, I am right about that. The only other member of the Gillard-Rudd ministry who came from a country area was the member for Hunter who was Minister for Defence between December 2007 and June to 2009—I think that is correct. I acknowledge the fact that Labor is recognising—

Honourable members interjecting—

You can have your say—

Honourable members interjecting—

No, as ministers I am talking about.

Deborah O'Neill (Robertson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The member for Riverina might need to do his homework before he comes to the chamber, rather than call on the other people in the class to answer the questions.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I acknowledge all the other ministers in the room who come from regional Australia. It is great that Labor is finally recognising that good people from regional Australia are here to represent the portfolio areas. I also want to acknowledge the fact that in round 3 of the RDAF funding Tumbarumba in my electorate will receiving $340,000 for a sports stadium. I appreciate that. I am always very balanced on these things. I expressed concern last night in the parliament about the fact that the electorates of Watson and Lalor are receiving funding in the next round, round 4. I do hope that Tumut shire, which was one of the final applicants for funding for Gocup Road, receive that funding because that is a vital corridor for transport and industry in that region.

I have some questions here from the shadow minister for sport, who is unable to be here. Is the relevant minister here or should I put them on notice?

Mr Tony Burke (Watson, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Madam Acting Deputy Speaker O'Neill, a point of order: if the member asks them, the conversation might move on and someone will find out and get a note to us, and we will be able to answer them, if not immediately then before we wind up.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will ask the ones that I can ask in the time I have left and I will put the others on notice. The member for Cowper asks: what is it the total value of all spending commitments by the Australian government in relation to the 2015 Asian Cup, including in-kind support, debt forgiveness, the Major Events Taskforce and direct assistance? What does the Australian public receive in return for contributions such as the substantial amount of money provided for a regional soccer tournament? What was the one-off grant of $50,000 to Football Federation Australia for which was provided sometime between January and May? Who authorised the grant? Under what program was the grant given? What is the anticipated final cost to the taxpayer for the rectification works of the AIS European training centre, including the cost of the review by Copa International SRL? Was any damage and defects caused by athletes through either accident or poor behaviour? The budget allocated an additional $1.8 million to ASADA over three years. Does this money increase represent a doubling of ASADA's investigative resources, as promised by the minister for sport at the 7 February press conference? The budget allocated an additional $3 million for the Major Events Taskforce. What will this $3 million be used for? How will the Major Events Taskforce be different from previous arrangements in relation to major events such as the 2006 Commonwealth Games?

The member for Cowper is unable to be here, but they are the questions he would like answered by the relevant minister. I do thank the House and I thank Labor for recognising that there are many good people amongst its ranks from regional areas to represent rural and regional Australia—real Australia.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Regional Services, Local Communities and Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I will briefly cover a couple of points. Firstly, I want to acknowledge that you have pointed to funding under Regional Development Australia round 3 that was in your electorate. I am happy that that project has been widely welcomed in your electorate, as it has been across the 79 project areas that were funded under that. I think that round has been a very good round and some good lessons were learned about the importance of supporting smaller rural communities as part of that. I know members here also had a number of projects in their own electorates that have been important as well.

The member for Maranoa, a good representative of regional Australia, got four projects under round 3 in his electorate—with three projects totalling $1.2 million. I was very disappointed that I did not get, 'Yes, that's fantastic; we got three projects' and all I got, 'Where's my fourth?' I have to say that was very disappointing. I heard him on ABC regional radio bemoaning the fact that the fourth project did not get up. He was saying, 'I don't just want the three projects; I want more and I'm disappointed.' He also said that it was a rort and everything had gone down the eastern seaboard. Frankly, I was disappointed that he called it a rort in the sense that he got three projects and not four.

In terms of the questions asked around RDAF 4, we have made decisions on that round. They will be announced over the course of the next month and I am looking forward to visiting many communities across the country to announce those projects. I was very pleased to announce the project in Werribee, which we discussed briefly before. Another project that we announced was in Sydney. Again, this is a very important arts and cultural precinct, which will be very important for that region. I know that it will make a substantial difference there. Also, a project that was announced in my own electorate, in Ballarat, was a regional soccer facility. Another very important project was announced in the member for Corangamite's electorate, not in my electorate, which I am sure he will have much to say about.

In reference to the sports questions, all of those issues were substantially covered in Senate estimates; they were discussed in quite a lot of detail. There were a number of hours of debate on them. So I say to the member for Cowper that the Senate estimates really did cover all of those questions.

Sid Sidebottom (Braddon, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think it is really positive that we are able to talk about an outstanding program that is available to rural and regional Australia—no matter how you want to define it. Most people in this room have only something very positive to say about it.

Opposition member interjecting—

I suppose it is still lingering for some of them. My friend from the Riverina has also been a recipient. His community won that argument in a very competitive round and so they merited RDA funding. I congratulate them on that. Before I go on and discuss a couple of mine, if I may, I want to say that I have had the privilege of having both ministers, who are here at the moment, visit my electorate in terms of their portfolios. To our new minister, may I congratulate you on that.

There are two programs that I want to mention in passing. The Active After-schools Community program is a fantastic program, and it has been largely rolled out in my electorate. We have a fantastic number of schools involved in it, and I do want to commend it to the government and also the continuation of its funding, Minister. Then there is the Creative Young Stars Program, which was announced recently and the $27,000 for every electorate. I congratulate the minister on that. I suppose he can read about it Hansard rather than hear me talk about it.

Another program that I would like to talk about is Happy feet at the Penguin Athletics centre. In round 1, the Central Coast Council—where I used to be a councillor; and I am very proud to have been a councillor—applied for funding and missed out. Like many councils, they were determined to learn from round 1, and they were successful in round 2. Effectively, they got $520,000 from us, along with their investment. What is so fantastic about these programs is that you get the co-investment of the communities, and so $531,000 will be put towards revamping what we call the Dial Regional Sports Complex. This funding has allowed the community to completely redo the surface, which will make it an all-weather surface and, at the same time, fix up a lot of the seating, as well as revamp the administration building and associated other builds. The Central Coast Council is a council that does not ask for much, unless it is in their pitching itself as well. This is a genuine regional sports complex, carrying out really important work—and that is, first and foremost, the health and wellbeing of our region and communities. A lot of RDA funding is associated with community health programs, so it is great for infrastructure and also very, very important for the health and wellbeing of our communities.

The other great thing about many of these projects is that they involve employment. This is very important, particularly in rural and regional Australia as we are challenged economically in a number of areas for a whole variety of reasons—it is a fact. These projects are very important for stimulating and sustaining employment. One thing that I forgot to add about the regional sports complex project—and, hopefully, Minister, you will be able to open it when it is completed—is that it involves improved lighting so that we will be able to have night programs for the region. I do congratulate the Central Coast Council on gaining that funding.

More recently—let me tell you: if you have not visited this place, you must—there was King Island, the absolute jewel in the crown of Tasmania. Every cow has a name; it is just called in personally to be milked. King Island has the most extraordinary cheese and beef that you can imagine. Not only is it going to have two world-class golf courses—

An honourable member: Do cows play golf?

The cows play golf! You put your bag on the cow and you take it around the golf course with you!

However, very importantly, you have to get onto the island. What have we got? The minister came over just recently: $500,000 to a project of well over a million dollars to completely upgrade the terminal. It is going to not only provide better amenity on the island but bring in even more tourists. There are no cows in this terminal! It is a fantastic project, and congratulations to the council. Minister, I am sure you will be able to enlighten us on other similar rural and regional projects and the importance of them to local communities.

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before putting a question to the minister, I would like to acknowledge the contribution of his predecessor, Minister Crean, as he did also. With the member for Parramatta, I convene the Labor Friends of the Arts, so I have worked with the previous minister, Minister Crean, and had a great function the other day with Minister Burke. Minister, my question is: in this modern world of social media and changing links around the world, how are we going to tell Australian stories and help define Australian culture—that vast, shifting Australian culture? What are the economic opportunities associated with that? Can you tell us about the new money contained in the budget for the reform of the Australia Council, which is the Australian government's principal arts funding body? Could you also touch on this exciting new program, the Creative Young Stars Program?

Michael Danby (Melbourne Ports, Australian Labor Party, Parliamentary Secretary for Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Moreton for that neat segue into the Creative Young Stars Program. I am not sure that I will be able to compete with the thespian parliamentary secretary who preceded me. The worth of this project came very sharply into focus for me after I met James Morrison at the Jazz Bell Awards and he told me that 3½ thousand young people were gathering in Mount Gambier, three or four weekends ago, to learn from Australia's international jazz musicians and the LA big band that had flown in specially from LA, which refused to do any commercial appearances. These people aged under 25 from all over Australia were coming to exhibit their creativity.

We know of these kinds of functions that take place all across Australia. We know of young people from all of our electorates who are desperate to get some way into a pathway into work in this area, to develop their creativity, and Creative Young Stars is just the program. It comes out of Creative Australia. This government has undertaken and designed it to help young people to achieve their full potential in the arts, creative industries, community service and the educational sector by developing their skills, abilities and professional connections and, as we said, opening up opportunities for work.

This is a similar program to the program we have developed in the area of sports. We do not want Australians just to be seen as brilliant sportsmen; we also want to see our National Cultural Policy develop in a creative Australia accessible to the young people of Australia. Creative Young Stars will see young people up to 25 years of age with the ability to apply for $8 million allocated across Australia to every federal seat equally. Grants are in four categories, for performing arts, cultural activities, academic endeavour and school and community achievement. The grants will help gifted young people to participate in such events as eisteddfods, public-speaking tournaments and cultural, artistic and academic events—and, just like Mr Morrison recommended, in events like Generations in Jazz, which took place in Mount Gambier for the 25th year.

The first application will be through your federal MP, who can grant up to 12 awards and two group grants in the electorate. Individuals are able to access $500 and groups are able to get grants of $3,000 for groups of six or more members. The grants for Creative Young Stars open on 1 June and close on 21 June. You can visit the youth.gov.au website for information and application forms and I expect it will be of great use to all members of parliament, not just government members. We are expecting enthusiastic participation on behalf of the young people in your electorates in regional and rural Australia as well as right across all of the cities. I pay great tribute to the Office for the Arts which, if members of parliament are not energetic enough, is going to follow up through all the regional art networks, making sure that young people right across this country—not just where there are active members of parliament—can access this wonderful program.

A division having been called in the House of Representatives—

Sitting suspended from 19 : 00 to 19 : 24

Julie Owens (Parramatta, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the proposed expenditure for the Regional Australia, Local Government, Arts and Sport portfolio be agreed to.

Proposed expenditure agreed to.

The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next meeting.