Matt Thistlethwaite (Kingsford Smith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As I was pointing out last night, a wonderful opportunity exists for the role that Australia can play in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Back in promoting development within the Pacific region. The Pacific is one of the areas in which living standards are at their lowest and nations are failing to meet their Millennium Development Goals. The power of infrastructure is to connect communities, to provide that has put links, the telecommunications hardware, the roads, the electricity and the power and energy supplies to leak communities. In doing so boost living standards. That is something that Austria can play an active role in through the Asian Infrastructure Investment Back. This is something that the Chinese government is acutely aware of. The Chinese investment in the Asia-Pacific region, particularly in the Pacific. In November 2013, Beijing announced a new assistance package for the Pacific islands, potentially worth more than US$2 billion. The package is made up of two loan facilities for use in infrastructure development, of up to US$1 billion each.

Already Chinese development aid associated with infrastructure in the Pacific has had some challenges. There have been issues associated with projects that have not been of great value to Pacific communities, particularly in terms of combating policy and eradicating disease, providing education facilities and boosting living standards. There are been issues associated with a soft loans and increasing levels of indebtedness. Anything that improves transparency and accountability of investment in the region is something that should be encouraged, particularly in respect of China's involvement. That is an area where Australia can play an active, cooperative role with China. These factors point to the need for more multilateral coordination and commercial discipline for infrastructure projects in the region. For Australia, China's development assistance should be viewed not as a threat but as an opportunity. Australia's dominance in the Pacific region means that we are in a strong position to work with China for the sake of good development outcomes and to strengthen our bilateral relationship.

Joining the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is a no-brainer for Australia and will provide opportunities for a greater role in shaping and encouraging sustainable development in our region. That is why Labor announced many months ago that, were we in government, we would sign up to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and why we welcome this government's eventual agreement to this. This is a positive economic development. In our view it took far too long. Thankfully, the government has seen the light, and we can now start working with broader Asia and, in particular, with our most important trading partner, China, in developing this great new multilateral financial institution for our region.

Nickolas Varvaris (Barton, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the House for the opportunity to speak on the important and exciting bill that we have before us. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015 has been in the making for some time now. It is a joint effort by our Treasurer, the Hon. Joe Hockey, and our Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Hon. Julie Bishop. The fruits of their labour are evident in the formation of this bill, which provides a rare and unique opportunity for Australia to showcase our position and give us a unique advantage in the Asia-Pacific. The decision for Australia to join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank comes after extensive discussions between the government, China and other key partners around the world. I am pleased that this bill will have bipartisan support, because it is clear that there are many positive aspects associated with joining this bank.

The timing of this bill is perfect because it dovetails on the incredible trifecta of free trade agreements the coalition has signed since coming into office. Free trade agreements with Korea, Japan and China mean Australians will have the opportunity of a generation to engage with our regional neighbours to make the best of increased export opportunities in goods and services. Importantly, free trade agreements will benefit further from this bill today, because having an enormous capital funding base will provide a huge opportunity for economic growth facilitated by Australia's ongoing positive and constructive relationships with its regional trading partners.

This bill will enable Australia to become a founding member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, which equates to a huge investment opportunity for our nation as a shareholder. This opportunity translates to ongoing prospects for Australian businesses wishing to trade and export with their regional partners. I am proud to be on the side of the House that looks to the future for Australia's economic prosperity.

The coalition is very proud of this bill because it is another component of our forward planning that looks to create opportunities and wealth for all our citizens. Creating the jobs of tomorrow and providing a stable economy underpin our philosophy of hope, opportunity and reward. We believe a core government duty is to render the right conditions and foster the relationships conducive to generating real prospects for all Australians. We believe in creating and harnessing the right conditions that encourage everyone to have a go. We believe in creating equal access to opportunities for all Australians so that we can all partake in the success of our nation, which will ensure our standards of living remain first-class.

Australia is an enviable nation in the developed world because not only do we live in a fantastic country surrounded by vast beauty; we have the infrastructure and economic conditions in place for Australians to really get the most out of life. A responsible thing for government to do is to plan for the future and increase chances for our nation to remain competitive and utilise partnerships and resources to generate the best deals we can for Australians.

This is where the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank comes in, because partaking in this rare shareholder opportunity allows our relationship with Asia to strengthen and ensures we are part of our region's growth and prosperity. Asia, in particular India and China, are on a growth trajectory that is a once-in-a-generation opportunity. Having an investment bank dedicated to the promotion of trade in a region that needs infrastructure investment is something that will positively impact on Australia.

As I mentioned previously, Asia is a growing region and, because of its proximity to Australia and our longstanding relationship, its prosperity and economic growth is tied closely to ours. A strong Asia, therefore, means a strong Australia, and a partnership allowing our authorised capital base to be injected into the Asia-Pacific region's acute infrastructure needs is a step in the right direction for us. When Australia invests in regional projects like railways, ports, transport, energy and water infrastructure, logistics, environmental protection, information and communication technology, and agriculture, we will also absorb the benefit, because it will enable better trade and exports. It will also create a demand for our expertise and services, as well as commodity products, thus, in turn, creating the jobs of tomorrow.

Important infrastructure like ports, railways and other forms of transport in places like Korea, India and Indonesia enables Australian products to reach new markets or expand existing markets. By way of example, it means we can export more of our excellent beef and dairy products; wine, which is a growing market; chocolate; seafood; cheese; fruit; and other things grown or produced in Australia that are highly valued in the Asia-Pacific.

Furthermore, a stake in our region's infrastructure projects is likely to drive demand for Australian services, including engineering, construction management, finance, consultancy and so forth, on top of the existing flow of services that has resulted from the free trade agreements. Australia will facilitate this through private sector investments and co-financing projects with other banks and financiers. Australian companies will be able to bid for projects financed by the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank through an open procurement model. Clearly, the opportunities are vast for regional engagement and project procurement.

The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is truly an amazing opportunity for Australia to participate in regional development and to further engage with its neighbours and with other member countries such as Vietnam, New Zealand, Singapore and the United Kingdom. Australia's investment of approximately $932 million in capital funding to the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank over five years will make it the sixth largest shareholder in the bank and a key member and investor, helping to build the region's infrastructure future.

In essence, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is similar to the World Bank or the Asian Development Bank, except that this will specifically focus on bridging the gap for infrastructure funding in the Asia-Pacific region. At this stage, it is estimated that a staggering US$8trillion is needed for this decade's infrastructure needs. This is a daunting task, but the only way to tackle it is to face it and develop a real plan that will be mutually beneficial. So the priority is to establish members who can contribute, and in a manner which will see acute needs in the transport, water and energy sectors being met. We have entered an unprecedented era in the knowledge economy, with globalisation of resources at play, but there is no point in not sharing our knowledge or our expertise when we can have transformational regional partnerships that foster better relationships with our neighbours and that, in turn, provide jobs and economic growth for Australia. We are uniquely placed to take advantage of the region's needs by being a part of a capital funding institution, which means we can also bid on projects.

The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is set to commence later this year. It will really see Australia recognised as a key regional partner through opportunities for a multitude of deals in the region. This bill allows Australia to work closely with China and other Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank members to establish a bank that is effective, accountable and transparent to complement the works of existing giants such as the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank.

As I mentioned previously, the enormous rise of Asia and its uncapped potential gives Australia the opportunity it deserves to help build the infrastructure of the 21st century. The bill today sets foundations for Australia's future. We signed a trifecta of excellent free trade agreements and now being a founding member of the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank will truly enable Australia to develop mutually beneficial relationships in the Asia-Pacific region. Asia has always been on our doorstep, and its economic prosperity is largely entwined with ours—thus, investing in Asia's future becomes part of ours. The vision for the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is to promote interconnectivity and economic integration in the region in addition to working with existing multilateral development banks. By becoming a shareholder in this bank, the coalition is providing a future for all Australians. By exporting our commodities, fostering trade relations and taking on regional projects delivering major infrastructure, we are given an opportunity to prove our ability as leaders and as innovators capable of delivering the answers to the needs of our Asia-Pacific neighbours. By helping to bridge the gap in Asia's infrastructure funding needs through the development of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, Australia has seized the chance to capitalise on tangible opportunities that will deliver hope, opportunity and reward. I commend this bill to the House.

Adam Bandt (Melbourne, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to make a few brief remarks about the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015. The hope I have is that this bill represents the start of a sensible discussion in this place and in the Australian community about how we should be financing the infrastructure that we need here and in our region. It is fairly clear that in Australia there is a need for greater investment and infrastructure, and we see that in our cities in particular. I speak as a representative of a capital city where we have incredible transport congestion and a growing population. There is a need in Melbourne, for example, to invest in rail projects and a need to invest in high speed rail down the eastern seaboard in particular—something that will come at significant upfront costs, but would be a productivity booster for cities along the eastern seaboard as well as something that is good for the planet and good for people.

Yet the discussion that we have had in this country about how to finance the infrastructure that we need has been marked by this incredible debt phobia. Parties which have been in government—Labor and Liberal parties—have run to successive elections on campaigns against debt, including debt that might be used to finance the infrastructure that this country or this region needs. It is often said, 'We must get deficit under control, because everyone understands you cannot spend money that you do not have.' But, on the other hand, people every day live with things called 'mortgages' and understand that if you borrow within your means to fund something that is going to end up being an asset that you own, that will be useful for you and the future generations, then it is a good thing to do. As long as you do not borrow too much, borrowing can be good—if you are investing in asset, in this case in productive infrastructure.

As a result of this debt phobia that both Labor and Liberal have been caught up in, we have seen investment in infrastructure fail in this country. It means that usually the only infrastructure that gets a guernsey is where a private operator comes along to a government that has this debt phobia and says, 'Have I got a deal for you! Let me build the project for you: you underwrite our losses and we will take any profits. Thank you very much.' We see that with the proposed East West Link in Melbourne and we see it with many other projects around the country as well.

Here, with this bill, we have a government saying, Let's potentially take a different approach in our region and let's actually get behind the idea that it is worthwhile putting government money into something so that projects can be financed through appropriate borrowing—so that infrastructure projects can be financed through debt. We do not necessarily need a Macquarie Bank or some private operator to come in and be our saviour for all future infrastructure needs in this country—actually, sometimes public spending on infrastructure projects can be worthwhile. If this is the start of a change in debate so that we can have a sensible debate about using government money to finance infrastructure projects here, or in our region, then it is to be welcomed. I especially hope that this starts to open up the question about how the enormous amount of money that we have sitting in superannuation funds in this country could be unlocked to invest in infrastructure projects, hopefully here in this country as well.

We have the irony, with this bill, of a government which, on the one hand, comes in here and rails against debt and deficit, even if that money might be borrowed to invest in some very useful piece of infrastructure in this country. On the other hand, the government, with this bill, is asking this parliament to be prepared to spend significant amounts of money to debt-finance infrastructure projects overseas. The irony—if not hypocrisy—of that is no reason to stand in the way of what the government is going to do, but it ought to be noted.

If the government, with this bill, is going to go down the road of putting money into the financing of infrastructure projects overseas, then, firstly, we have to do it with our eyes open. Secondly, we have to do it with some conditions attached. When we look at the records of the other countries with whom we are being asked to partner as part of this bill and as part of this bank, it is very, very clear that, when it comes to the environment and when it comes to protecting people's labour standards, these countries do not always have a great track record. In fact, when it comes to infrastructure, there is quite often the temptation to say: 'Let's get the environment out of the way so that we can build something. Let's not worry about the labour wages and conditions on which we employ people. Let's just go ahead and build it. Let's go to the cheapest possible bidder. Let's have the greatest possible disregard for the environment that we can.' We are seeing that in action today here in this country.

I hope that the government, as a potential founding member of this bank, takes the opportunity to live up to the rhetoric about transparency and insists that, when the bank is formed, there are minimum requirements to protect the environment and minimum conditions to protect the people who are working on the projects that this bank will finance. Otherwise, the government is potentially giving a blank cheque to environmental exploitation and the exploitation of people. I still have hope, despite what the government has done in recent days. We have had the Minister for the Environment in here saying that environmental laws do not need to complied with and that apparently only the people who are directly affected by projects should have standing. Perhaps the Minister for the Environment is suggesting that animals, plants and the Great Barrier Reef ought to start hiring lawyers themselves and appearing.

If that is the approach that the government takes domestically, it would not at all surprise me if it turns a blind eye to the projects that this bank funds, but I hope that it does not. I hope that it takes its rhetoric seriously. Who knows? By the time that this bank comes around to being established, we may have a new government in place. Things are moving very quickly in this place, and the Australian people are turning on this government because of its neglect of some basic minimum conditions—minimum protections for the environment and minimum protections for people. It might well be that there is a new government in place by the time that this bank actually becomes a reality. If there is, I would urge that new government to stand by what they are saying in the chamber today and this week about their commitment now to minimum environmental standards and to ensure that that applies not just to infrastructure that is being built in Queensland or elsewhere around Australia but also to infrastructure that is built in our region. If there is a change of government, there may be a very good opportunity to insist on minimum labour standards and minimum environmental standards in what this bank does.

To conclude, given that we are potentially going to be a founding member of this bank, we are in a great position to insist that what the bank does meets the highest environmental standards and meets the highest labour standards. We are also in a position where we might start having a bit more of a sensible debate about borrowing sensibly to fund the infrastructure here that Australia needs, instead of being continually caught up in debt phobia.

David Coleman (Banks, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am particularly proud to have the opportunity to speak on this very important enabling legislation allowing, as it does, Australia to sign up to become a member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015 is a piece of legislation which is not only important today; I believe that, in the decades to come, people will reflect back on the formation of this bank and see it as a very significant development in the Asia-Pacific economy, in China's relationship with the region, and, most importantly for us, in the relationship between our great nation and China. This is a very, very big deal, to put it simply.

The relationship between Australia and China has got stronger and stronger under the Abbott government. It is, of course, the Abbott government—through the good offices of the Minister for Trade and Investment—who finally delivered a free trade agreement between Australia and China. I will come back to that a little bit later, because there have been some very unfortunate and plainly wrong comments made on that free trade agreement, by those opposite. We will need to address those comments a little later in this discussion.

In relation to the AIIB specifically, there are three things that I want to do. I want to explain what it is, I want to talk a little bit about why it matters so much generally and I want to talk about how it is consistent with our policy of very practical engagement with China. Engagement is one of those words that can be a bit of a cliche. In a practical sense, what it means is that we continue to work closer and closer with China, because every day that we do that is the day that we are creating more jobs. That is what it is all about.

The AIIB, of course, is a $100 billion fund to invest in infrastructure in the Asia-Pacific region. Infrastructure is so important, as we all know, because it is the economic gift that keeps on giving. You build a road today, and that road is there for decades to come. You build a port, and ships not yet built will be arriving at it in the years ahead. That is particularly important in the Asia-Pacific region, where there is a very clear deficit of infrastructure. Infrastructure helps trade between our nations, it helps to raise living standards in the nations in which the infrastructure takes place and it can only be a good thing.

It also creates commercial opportunities, because you cannot get goods into a market unless that market has the infrastructure to cope with the physical delivery of those goods. There are many places in the Asia-Pacific region where the roads are so bad, the ports are non-existent or in a very, very poor condition and the general supporting infrastructure, frankly, is not there to enable the development of the modern market economy. We know that modern market economies produce the best results. They produce the best results for the most people and they produce the best results for the ordinary members of those communities, so anything that we can do to light the spark of modernisation and industrialisation in the Asia-Pacific region is something that we should absolutely do.

That is what this fund is going to do. It is going to be $100 billion, which is a lot of money and a lot of investment in various projects around the Asia-Pacific region. It has a greater significance as well, because the AIIB represents a very significant formation of a new multilateral institution in our region. Importantly, with China initiating the AIIB and taking a lead role in its formation and subsequent development, it creates a fantastic opportunity for nations of our region and, indeed, of the world to work closely, collaboratively and cooperatively in a multilateral environment.

Multilateral organisations have their frustrations. They can sometimes get bogged down in bureaucracy. When they are not functioning effectively, they can become debating societies and that is a problem. It is certainly not something that we would ever want to see with the AIIB. But multilateral institutions are very important because they get us all around the table and they get us, as nations, talking at the same level about issues of common concern. If you look at the history of the last 70 years or so since the Second World War, it is difficult not to conclude that the development of multilateral institutions has been a very good thing for the world.

We know in Europe there is a long history of horrendous conflicts and of economic sabotage by one nation onto another. We know that through the EU, with all its limitations and all its faults, that we now have a situation where European nations are sitting around a table and talking about how much milk should be allowed into one country or the other, or whatever the controversies of the day are. That is far preferable environment than one where there is an absence of direct relationships between nations and where there is an absence of the space in which to have those practical and pragmatic conversations. The development of multilateral institutions is a good thing. Even with the UN—again, for all its faults—it is very hard to argue that it has not had a constructive benefit on the international security environment since the Second World War.

I believe that the AIIB is going to have a fantastic impact in bringing dozens of nations in—50 have signed up so far and there are more to come—to talk about the infrastructure needs of the Asia-Pacific region and to constructively—through agreed, objective articles of association—determine where to invest for both the economic return and the benefit of the investing nations. It is really significant to think about all of the nations that have signed up to the AIIB. This is no small enterprise. China, to its tremendous credit, initiated the AIIB and has played the lead role in bringing together all of these nations.

It is a very diverse group: China is there; Israel is there; the Middle East is represented through nations like Qatar and Saudi Arabia; and the United Kingdom has signed up to the AIIB, despite being a little way away from the region. We have signed up too. We are the sixth largest investor and a founding investor. That is a good thing, because it means we are there on the ground floor and it means that we have the capacity to have a direct stake in those discussions about the precise governance model, the operating fashion and so on of the AIIB. The development of this is something that is, as I said before, not just something for today but something that 30 years from now people will look back on and think was a very important development.

The AIIB is significant also in the broader context of Australia's relationship with China. My community has the largest group of Australians of Chinese background of anywhere in the nation; it is about 20 per cent. My community is extraordinarily supportive of both the AIIB and the relationship between Australia and China more generally. It is really interesting to reflect on how that relationship has evolved. If you go back 20 years, which is not that long ago in the history of the world, back then China's trade with Australia was about $6 billion. It was less than one-fifth of the size of the trading relationship with Japan and less than one-quarter of the size of the trading relationship with the United States. That was only 20 years ago.

If you go back 15 years, and I find this to be probably the most interesting statistic of all, Australia's trading relationship with China was smaller than our trading relationship with New Zealand. Until about 2000, we had a bigger trading relationship with New Zealand, a nation of a few million people, than we did with China. It was just extraordinary. By 2003-04, trade with China was our third-largest trading relationship but still substantially smaller than with the US and Japan. By 2008-09 China had become our largest trading partner, but with only a little bit more than Japan. Then in the last year for which we have figures, 2013-14, the relationship was worth $160 billion. It was more than double the size of trade with our second-biggest trading partner—still Japan—and represented 24 per cent of our entire trade with the entire world in goods and services. Think about that: 24 per cent, one quarter of our entire relationship in international trade, was with the People's Republic of China. Another key point is that for every dollar that we send to China $2 comes to Australia. For every dollar we spend buying goods or services from China, $2 comes from China to our shores. That is a powerful indicator of the importance of this.

The relationship with China through the AIIB and the FTA is incredibly important. That is why it is a very negative development that those opposite have sought to oppose the free trade agreement between Australia and China and make outrageous and inaccurate claims about what that agreement contains. Remember that this is the nation with which we have one quarter of our entire trade, and it is growing very rapidly. It is the biggest economy in the world today on some measures, certainly within the decade, regardless of what measure you use. We should be doing everything we sensibly can to create Australian jobs by building the relationship with China. If that is not economics 101 then I do not know what is, but those opposite have been shamefully misrepresenting the terms of the free trade agreement, basically to say two things: (1) that workers from China are going to come in on lower wages than Australians and (2) that workers from China are going to come in without the appropriate qualifications, and this is going to be an appalling thing.

Bob Carr is the chairman of an institution called the Australia China Relations Institute. It has turned its mind to these questions in recent days. I might just read a quote from ACRI about this issue of workers: 'If the China FTA is ratified any temporary workers will come to Australia under the existing 457 visa scheme. This scheme allows employers to access workers where a genuine skills shortage exists. The worker protection act of 2008 means that these visa holders are entitled to receive pay and conditions at least as good as those of Australian workers who are doing the same work at the same workplace.' Let's repeat that: at least as good as those of Australian workers who are doing the same work at the same workplace. The same applies to skills. If there are state or federal rules about skills, any worker who comes to Australia under the free trade agreement needs to comply with those rules.

So, it is absolutely false, it is damaging and it is, frankly, irresponsible for those opposite to seek to sow division and fear rather than to appeal to the better angels of our nature and the economic future of the country, and they stand condemned for it. This shameful campaign against the free trade agreement is something that I suspect some of the more sensible members opposite will be reluctant to associate themselves with. It is absolutely wrong.

My community is very supportive of the free trade agreement. A few weeks ago we had the indefatigable small business minister in my electorate to host a seminar on the free trade agreement. It was very well received in Hurstville. I would like to thank the members of the Southern Region Chinese Business Association for their attendance at the event. The association does a great job advocating on behalf of the local business community in my electorate and I know they are strong supporters of the free trade agreement.

In this area it is all about action; it is all about getting things done. The Abbott government, the Minister for Trade—the whole team—are getting a lot of things done in this space, and it will be to the great long-term benefit of the nation.

Clare O'Neil (Hotham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I really appreciate the opportunity to speak on the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015, and I want to thank the member for Banks for his contribution. He made some good points, some of which I am in furious agreement with but others I am not. Before I turn to the specifics of this bill, I will just note that we heard some assertions about economic maxims, and one of the first economic maxims you learn in trade economics is that trade agreements create winners and losers. What I find disappointing about some of the tenor of the discussion that has been had about the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement is the idea that we cannot have a really frank national discussion that looks beneath the surface of what is in the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement and a really frank conversation about who is winning and who is losing under this agreement. There are significant, legitimate concerns about the impact on the labour market in Australia—and I say that as someone with a lot of economics training and someone who considers herself to be very strongly supportive of free trade. But, as anyone who is well-versed in discussions about free trade knows, these agreements are not just about free trade, and we need to be very careful that we make good trade-offs that are in the interests of everyday Australians when we make these agreements. Otherwise, we lose the argument with the Australian people. If we do not make good free trade agreements then free trade itself gets called into question, and I do not think that is something that either side of the House wants to see.

We have heard from members on both sides of the House about what a great opportunity the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is for Australia, and I will add some remarks on that basis. Many other speakers have talked about the very large infrastructure gap across Asia. Some have estimated this lack of expenditure to be somewhere around $8 trillion over the next decade. When Asia does not have the infrastructure it needs for development, it costs everyone in the world; it certainly costs people living in Asia as they struggle to develop in the way we want to see. But it also costs Australians, because the frank reality is that for Asian nations to export to Australia they need to travel on roads and use rail and use ports and all these other facilities, and that adds costs to us as Australians, particularly to Australian consumers.

One of the really fantastic stories of the past 30 or 40 years, looking at the globe as a whole, is the increase in the standard of living that we have seen across many countries in Asia. It is through investment in infrastructure that we see people's standard of living grow. As an internationalist, as someone who is supportive of development right across the world, I am very excited about what is occurring and Australia's involvement in it.

We know that the bank will help catalyse private sector investment. So this is not just about foreign governments and foreign countries looking to invest in infrastructure; it is about bringing in all of the parties to co-finance projects. The member for Banks talked at great length about the importance of multilateralism. Again, that is something we want to see more and more of in our region. This is a great opportunity for Australia to deepen the links and deepen the relationship that we have with our Asian neighbours. It is good to see that we are getting in on the ground floor—though I think we could probably have done it a little more seamlessly, which I will talk about in a moment. It is also a symbol of our shared commitment as Australians to development in Asia. This is something that we really want to get across to people living right across this region. As Australians we want to do everything we can to build living standards in Asia, to help bring Asians up to the standard of living that Australians enjoy. Being part of this bank and being an enthusiastic member is definitely a part of that.

We welcome the commitment to the principle of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. We welcome the financial commitment that has been put forward. One thing other speakers have talked about is their frustration that this decision was not come to earlier, and more enthusiastically, on the part of the government. Frankly, it is been quite confusing to watch the debate that has occurred on the other side of the House about how to manage the proposal for Australia to be a foundation member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. We have heard flourishing speeches from both sides of the House about all the benefits. Why then did it take months for the government to decide that it actually wanted to be involved? It was actually Labor that came out of the blocks very early to point out what huge benefits there were in participating in such an institution and that the earlier and more enthusiastically we engage with these institutions the more benefits we will get.

I raise these points not just to be political but because I think it reflects something that underlies a lot of our discussion and Australia's engagement with Asian economies that I think is a real barrier to us getting the most out of growth in that region. So I want to talk about these attitudes and a little bit about what Australian governments can do about them. The ambivalence of attitude that we saw when this proposal was initially put to the Australian government reflects within the psyche of Australians the lack of comfort that we feel about really participating fully in being engaged within our own region.

I think it also demonstrates something equally terrifying, which is the sense that it is a fait accompli that just because we are somewhere in the Asian region we are innately going to benefit and grow as Asia grows around us. On both counts, those are false assumptions. When we look at the things that are going to drive prosperity in Australia in the long term, being a part of Asia, committing to being a part of Asia and feeling ourselves to be a part of Asia are absolutely central to making sure we continue to another generation of prosperity in this country. One of the really terrifying implications of these attitudes is the sense that policy does not matter when we think of making the most of the Asian opportunity. And the sense we got from those on the other side was: 'Here is the suggestion; maybe we will consider it. There seem to be downsides and there seem to be upsides.' I think that is completely the wrong approach to take. Policy is going to be essential. If we do not get the policy settings right then we are going to be living in the midst of this incredibly fast growing and eventually incredibly prosperous region but we are not going to get the benefits because we have decided that we are going to step back; we do not think we need to do anything to capture this opportunity and we believe it will just be delivered to us on a platter. It will not.

Australia's future lies very much within Asia. There would be no argument from anyone in this House about that. All of the data and evidence that we can look to makes that very clear. China is already Australia's largest export partner. Six of Australia's top 10 export partners are Asian countries, and Singapore, Malaysia and Korea are on that list. It is very exciting for Australia that we have already got these thriving trade relationships because we all know that an incredible growth story is unfolding right before our eyes. Some economists think that, by 2040, two of every three dollars of wealth created will come from our region and half of every dollar of wealth created will come from China and India alone. This is an absolutely staggering change in the centre of economic power in the world and it is something from which Australia can of course benefit significantly.

Disturbingly, when you look at the actual evidence of how we are embracing this opportunity and engaging with it across different sectors of our economy, you do see some real causes for concern. PwC produced a very interesting report last year called Passing Us By. They did a very large survey of Australian businesses and came up with some really terrifying statistics. One of those statistics was that today only nine per cent of Australian businesses are doing business in a significant way in Asia. For all the talk in this parliament and the various forums that we participate in, it is shocking to think that fewer than one in 10 Australian businesses are engaging with Asia. The report found not only that but also that this does not reflect a general reluctance on the part of Australian businesses to engage overseas. In fact, the report found that Australian companies are investing seven times as much in New Zealand as they are in China. That is a wild fact when you think about the incredible growth—not just the current size of China compared to New Zealand but what we will see over coming years. PwC also found in that report that not only are we engaging more with New Zealand than we are with some other partners but that the Americas and the European nations are very enthusiastically investing in and engaging with Asia. So we are really getting left behind in all of this, and other countries around the world are trying to pick up this opportunity.

My colleague the member for Gellibrand and I have just done a pretty big piece of work about some of these issues. In doing that, we talked to a lot of exporters about why it is that some of them are struggling so much to push into this region. They talked to us about some very practical problems. Probably the first thing people raise with you is the language barrier. So, you would think we would have a thriving and exciting push within Australian schools to be learning Asian languages. But what we find, again, is a very disappointing outcome: today only six per cent of Australian students are learning an Asian language at school, and we are actually going backwards on this. As a share of the school population there were more students learning Asian languages in the year 2000 than there are today, in 2015. Again, the point here is that policy really matters. We need to address this. We need to do something about it.

Something else we heard a lot from exporters is that it takes a lot of time to cement trusting relationships with people in Asia. Learning about the different economics in different Asian markets takes time. PwC found that it was taking around 15 years for an Australian company going into Asia to start to really make serious money. Fifteen years is a really long commitment, and when you see that CEO tenures in Australia are something like 4.2 years on average you can understand why we are not seeing that real push into Asia. It probably does not help that when big Australian companies, listed companies, try to go into Asia they are often pummelled by business analysts who say that it is a wild, crazy and outlandish thing to do. Again, this reflects this basic attitude. People are talking the talk about the big opportunity that lies ahead, but when we look at the actual activities of Australian businesses we are just not seeing what we want to see.

There are issues around government, too. The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade probably needs to do some thinking and some work about its Asian expertise and Asian language capabilities within the department.

While I am speaking very positively about the opportunity we see today with the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, I just want to make sure that when we have these debates in the parliament we have them in a measured and fact-based way. As much as it might feel good for us to all come into this chamber and speak very excitedly about all of the opportunities that lie ahead, I want us to be really cognisant of the facts. The facts are that when we look at the education system and at different aspects of the machinery of government, and especially when we look at business, we are not seeing the kind of enthusiasm, engagement and upskilling in the Asian competencies that we are going to need to make the most out of this incredible growth.

What do we need to do about all of these things? I think the first thing is to have a national discussion about how we are going to make the most of this opportunity. It is not going to be through machinery of government or bills that we put through this parliament. It will be about everyday Australians understanding the realities of living in the Asian region and thinking about how they as individuals are going to better engage with our neighbours.

It is fascinating to talk to businesses. You would think they would raise issues about practical and legal barriers to taking advantage of these export opportunities, but when it really comes down to it the main barriers are about people—people-to-people links and having trusting relationships across national boundaries. This is the sort of thing that governments are inherently capable of assisting with. Some of the things are around really pushing education transfers, so we make sure that the brightest and best young people in China and other Asian countries are coming here to Australia not only to study but also to learn about our culture, to make friends and develop trusting relationships with Australians—and we would like to see a lot more of that going in the other direction too.

I will finish by coming back to where I began, which is to talk about the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement. I say again that we need to be a lot more nuanced in the discussion we are having today in this parliament about all of these issues. It is not only the bank over which there was this seemingly petty, silly political tussle but it is also happening for things like the free trade agreement and the set of government policies that are going to need to support Australia getting the most out of this region. The opportunity is there, but we need to embrace it enthusiastically and get the policy right, and that is the discussion we need to be having.

David Gillespie (Lyne, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015 is a very important bill because it is the mechanism by which we are becoming a foundation member of a very exciting, new international investment bank. I would like to say a few words about the importance of it, the nature of it and its relationship to trade and the wellbeing of Australia. Our signing into this bank is a very important international initiative, and it is central to our standing within Asian and international communities, and I support it. In this bank we see a new institution that will allow our economy to become more enmeshed in the amazing growth in Asia. It is essential that we are involved at its foundation and remain a member as we would lose so much credibility and influence and so many economic opportunities with our neighbours and trading parties, and I think we would also lose the respect of our allies.

This enabling legislation for us to become a member of the bank means we will be part of a bank capitalised to the value of $100 billion. Its aim is to deliver infrastructure across the Asian region: not in the form of small-scale micro investments or micro loans or loans with an aid flavour; it will be on a commercial basis to deliver ports, airports, roads, railways—all the major logistical things that Asian countries need at the moment. At the moment there is a huge deficit of infrastructure with a value of up to $3 trillion that needs to be installed in Asian countries for them to be able to continue to grow, flourish and trade with countries like Australia. The Asia-Pacific, as I said, is rapidly going ahead in leaps and bounds, but this will turbocharge the miracle of the Asian economy. Also, having a seat at the table and being the sixth largest contributor of capital will give us a seat on the board. The infrastructure that will actually come out of all of the investments that it will make will, in itself, mean potential markets for Australian products, whether it is for producers of metals, skills, financial services, IT, engineering, architecture, legal services and other services in our expanding service industries, or even for our traditional exports of food. Huge economic opportunities for our food and fibre will come out of the growth of a developed economy across all Asian nations. As I mentioned, it will not have an aid focus like the IMF or the World Bank; it will be a more commercially-generated banking ethic that will be in existence with this bank.

Our contribution will be to the value of US$3.7 billion, with an initial contribution of $738.3 million. It will be paid in cash over the first four years, with the remaining $2.9 billion in signed-up capital being presented in promissory notes. There has already been extensive dialogue with China and the other founding members. I am proud to see that Australia was the first signatory and has been followed subsequently by 55 others. They are not just countries in Asia. The UK has signed up. Other European countries have signed up. We are part of a very exciting initiative. We will have a constituency as a result of our seat on the board, and I cannot see too many bad things coming out of new infrastructure being built in Asia.

I have just a few words to say about the trade issue. It is a very topical issue at the moment, particularly as evidenced by the fine words of the member for Banks and the member for Hotham. We have established that multilateral trade and multilateral institutions are good, but in the press and coming from members on the other side there is a lot of dispute and, I think, distortion of some features of the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement, mainly revolving around a side letter to the agreement and taking matters in that out of context. If in the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement there are investments over $150 million, there are facilities where the labour market testing does not have to happen at the front end of the deal. The deal gets signed, sealed and wrapped up. But when the employment comes at the back end of the deal, the same 457 criteria apply, the same employment criteria apply and the same skills and registrations apply. Taking it out of context has really been done quite mischievously by unions and unionists who are praying on people's fear about their job. The thing to remember about international trade and infrastructure building is that all these things develop stronger economies—particularly in a country like Australia, where 60 to 70 per cent of what we grow and make gets exported. So the more markets we have and the stronger trade we have mean that there are more jobs and more economic security for our economy and for people who are in work. There are more jobs for more trade.

The China-Australia Free Trade Agreement is going to put our existing trading terms onto another level. In my electorate of Lyne, the most obvious winners straight-up are our beef and dairy producers. At the moment we have a couple of producers, in Wingham for instance—Wingham Beef Exports—which export all across Asia and into China. In Wauchope we have another group that exports processed beef into China. At the moment they are facing 12 to 25 per cent tariffs, so Wingham Beef Exports and Meltique Beef will get a free kick as their tariffs of 12 to 25 per cent will be gone over nine years.

We have wine producers that export into China—Cassegrain Wines on the Pacific Highway at Sancrox, just between Wauchope and Port Macquarie; a great business. They are exporting into China and the current tariffs, which are 14 to 20 per cent, will recede to zero. Dairy producers across the Manning, on the Comboyne Plateau and to the north and south of the electorate who sell into the Australian markets will get better farm gate prices, because some of the exporters, like NORCO, one of the local producers on the Mid-North Coast, is exporting into China. That will open up a whole new market for their new factory, just to the north of my electorate. They will be able to have long-life milk—but fresh long-life milk—able to be exported directly into the Chinese market. That means there will be more demand for milk, so the local dairy producers will have more demand for their product and their farm gate price will go up over time.

There are many horticultural producers who will get great opportunities. Many of the fruit producers and other producers, like Ricardoes Tomatoes, have great opportunities, and so do macadamia producers. I have colleagues from electorates that produce pharmaceuticals—like my good friend the member for Bennelong. Australia has a huge pharmaceutical production industry, but there are tariffs when drugs made here in Australia go over to China. This is going to deliver wins for my city colleagues. The country cousins are jumping because we have different industries from our city cousins, but it is all good.

The other scuttlebutt that the commentariat and the unionists have thrown in and are having a field day with in the other multilateral trade agreements is about ISDS provisions—like in the TPP. That is stalled, because they cannot reach agreement. But there are also ISDS provisions in the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement—investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms. Hello? All our trade agreements have ISDS provisions. This is nothing new. They are designed to protect Australian investors overseas just as much as trade investors in our country. There is nothing sinister about these mechanisms. They are there for a reason.

I reiterate: the labour market testing, the wages and the skill levels required for any workers that come to this country for these megaprojects, or on 457 visas, are not changing one iota. But, in signing a deal worth more than $150 million, at the front-end of the deal one does not have to go through the labour market testing or these other procedures—otherwise you would never get any deal signed. It is just a practical way of doing business; it sets the ground rules. Just like, in a game of sport, you need a referee and you need a set of rules, that is what happens when you have trade agreements, whether multilateral or bilateral.

The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank will be a huge boost. It will capitalise loans on a commercial basis. It will attract other capital. All of these burgeoning economies in Asia will get the infrastructure they need to go forward and create wealth for their country, and there will be more economic opportunities for Australia. President Xi, in this chamber, spoke about the new 'silk road' into the Chinese economy—and this very infrastructure will be part of that silk road. The more trade that goes one way, the more that can come back the other way. Australia will be a beneficiary. We have got a seat at the table. We were one of the initial contributors—and the sixth biggest—so we will have a say in the policy and the decisions that are made. I commend this bill to the House.

Tim Watts (Gellibrand, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If Australia is to reap the benefits of the Asian century, we need to engage proactively with our region. The Indo-Pacific, our geostrategic sphere and our immediate sphere of economic influence, is going through a fundamental change. As the epicentre of world growth and political power shifts east, we are seeing our region grow at an unprecedented rate. The Asian century is already upon us and, over the coming decades, countries in our region will become more wealthy and more powerful.

The Asian century spans further than just China—by 2050 our region will be home to 10 of the 25 biggest economies in the world. While there is frequently much talk about the growth prospects of China and India, in a few short decades Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Thailand, Vietnam and Malaysia will all be amongst the biggest economies in the world. The Professor of Strategic Studies at the Australian National University, Hugh White, outlines the change for Australia's geostrategic environment starkly, noting that only 20 years ago Australia's economy was as big as China's, bigger than India's and bigger than the whole of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations put together.

How things have changed. How things have changed in the past 20 years and how things will change even more drastically over the next 20. In two decades from now, two-thirds of every dollar of wealth created globally will come from our region. If we are to be competitive, if we want to increase our standard of living and if we want to reap the benefits of the growth of our region, we must engage with this change. We must be more open, connected and engaged with our region than we have ever been before in our history. This is not beyond us. In our history Australia has been at the centre of some of the most successful international institutions and we have been able to shape the international sphere to our advantage.

We were influential in the foundation of the United Nations and played a key role in the establishment of APEC, the APEC leaders' forum, and the G20. These institutions have played a major role in seeing economic growth in our region and across the world. As a middle power, we have an interest in ensuring that economic growth continues in our region. We also have an interest in promoting increased economic integration with the countries of the Indo-Pacific. However, there are major constraints on our region's ability to grow, and in order for our region to grow and become more prosperous over the coming decades it needs infrastructure. The scale of the infrastructure needed in our region is enormous. The infrastructure gap in our region is estimated at approximately $8 trillion between 2010 and 2020 alone. The immediate 'hard' infrastructure needs come in the form of roads, railways, ports and harbours, telecommunications and electricity grids. However, there is also a range of equally important 'soft' infrastructure components that are needed, such as policies and regulations that ensure hard infrastructure investments are sufficiently efficient and cost effective.

There is a new emphasis on trade, regional economic cooperation, interconnectivity and collective action on public problems in the Indo-Pacific. The region's ability to sustain high growth rates calls for huge investments from government, the private sector and non-governmental organisations to be facilitated by multilateral institutions. Without the implementation of both hard and soft infrastructure, the world's fastest growing region will be stunted, causing countries' domestic productivity to decline, undermining international competitiveness and halting efforts to alleviate poverty. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank will help fill that void, and assist governments and the private sector in funding the major projects throughout Asia that our region needs to continue to grow.

This multilateral development bank is a significant moment in Asia's recent history. The bank is, at its heart, a poverty alleviation institution, and has the potential to boost infrastructure investment in our region by more than $100 billion. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank will focus on investment in productive sectors in Asia, including energy and power, transportation, telecommunications, regional and rural infrastructure, agricultural development, water and sanitation, environmental protection, and urban development. The bank will work with, and alongside, existing multinational development banks on infrastructure investment in Asia.

Apart from the establishment of a specific infrastructure investment institution for Asia, an admirable development in itself, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank also signifies another important development—China's intent to engage positively and openly on the international stage. For years countries have encouraged China to play a larger role in assisting with development and engagement. The Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank has been multilateralised, and power has been shared across its members. This is a far cry from a unilateral investment bank acting as a tool to advance Chinese geostrategic national interests.

Some critics stress that there are still unresolved issues relating to the transparency and governance of the bank, and that Australia should not have agreed to be a part of it until those questions had been answered. Others have argued that the money should have gone into existing institutions, such as the World Bank, the IMF or the Asian Development Bank. There are also arguments, emanating predominately from outside Asia, that the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is a signal of Chinese expansionism, and that this institution will use projects to leverage Chinese geostrategic objectives. I do not agree with the validity of these arguments. It goes without saying that institutions of this size need sufficient oversight and governance arrangements, and that transparency is essential to the legitimacy of such institutions. While I have faith in other existing institutions active in the region, such as the World Bank, the IMF and Asian Development Bank, they have not evolved in a way that is coping with the demands for infrastructure in our region. There is space for another multilateral institution to help fund the infrastructure investments necessary to allow the Indo-Pacific to continue to grow steadily.

While there is little argument about the chronic need for infrastructure to facilitate future growth in the Indo-Pacific, some have concerns over how this can be addressed by a new organisation without the institutional knowledge and history necessary for such a monumental task. This is a further argument for Australian involvement in this institution. Countries like Australia need to take a lead role in establishing these institutions, drawing on our significant capacity-building skills and governance expertise. This calls for more collective action in our region, not less—something that the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank overtly calls for. The bank is intended to encourage regional and non-regional membership, and many of Australia's allies in the region, and throughout the world more broadly, threw their support behind the bank some time ago—nations include the UK, New Zealand, South Korea, Germany, France, Italy, India and Singapore.

Australia was invited, very early on in the piece, to be a founding member of the bank. We could have had a very significant influence from the outset on developing the bank's core philosophy, principles, policies, value systems and operating platform. However, the dithering and stalling of the Abbott government has left us stranded on the starting line. This bill, in many ways, is another example of the model of 'good government' used by the Abbott government—a cabinet divided between those distracted by the nonsense on stilts of the Anglosphere and the more sensible elements in the government who understand the need to engage in our region, and that Australia's future lies in the Indo-Pacific, and most specifically in South-East Asia.

The deadline for founding membership had to be extended, and even then Australia just scraped in. This is no way to engage in the international arena. Waiting for other countries to lead, while we take a back seat, is not the way to advance Australia's interests in a rapidly changing region. It sends the wrong message. It says that Australia is not a confident middle power in the Indo-Pacific with an independent foreign policy and interests of our own to pursue. If we want to be seen as leaders in the region, we simply have to lead. Labor has been calling for Australia to sign up as a founding member of the bank for many months now. But for reasons not clearly expressed in the public arena, members of the government, cabinet and the National Security Committee argued, stalled and leaked against each other until it was too late to for us to have a meaningful impact on the early development of this bank.

There are obvious advantages to membership of a development bank of this kind. We could have played a part in shaping the institution from its inception. This is an institution that will enable our region to grow and prosper, but this government shrugged its shoulders and walked away. It has been an embarrassing display from the government, but a decision-making process that has become sadly familiar in the months since. It should not have been surprising that the government has been found wanting in the international arena—not willing to engage, and displaying dismissive aggression when faced with criticism. The Abbott government has trashed Australia's relationship with our nearest neighbours, excluded itself from the regional solution to the Rohingya refugee crisis and cut foreign aid to the tune of $11.3 billion. We should have expected that a government with this record would cut off its nose to spite its face and decline to be part of an institution that would be of benefit not only to the people of our region but to the Australian national interest as well. It was embarrassing that the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade and the Prime Minister were actively campaigning in the cabinet and the National Security Committee to make sure that Australia was not one of the first to sign up to this bank. I am encouraged that the more moderate of the Liberal Party—the few that are left—were able to turn them around. But, sadly, this is illustrative of the kind of dysfunction that reigns at the highest levels of this government. They have to be dragged to get to a position so obvious that governments, NGOs and business throughout the region are united in supporting.

When the government first announced it would not be joining the bank from the outset, former Prime Minister Paul Keating said what many in Australia were already thinking:

The government's decision to decline founding membership of the Chinese-proposed Asian infrastructure bank is the worst policy decision the government has taken since assuming office.

It is the worst because of the far-reaching implications and consequences of deciding to have nothing geo-economically to do with China at a time when China is prepared to step up to greater responsibilities in the region.

Luckily, after months of indecision and infighting, the Abbott government will formally sign up as a founding member. The reasons for joining then were just as convincing as the reasons for joining now, and Labor has been actively campaigning for months for the government to change its position. It is unclear what triggered the change of heart inside the government. However, the logic has been strong throughout. When the Treasurer recently defended the expenses accrued by the previous Speaker by flying around Europe campaigning for the presidency of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, he said:

When we're part of international organisations, no matter what they are, it is good for Australia to take a leadership role.

Surely that logic must have applied here, too, on this much more significant piece of institutional infrastructure. Not only should we be part of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank; we should follow the Treasurer's advice and take a leadership role. This is especially the case when the institution's intention is to support much-needed infrastructure development and the bank has been welcomed both by governments and by businesses managing ever-expanding regional and global supply chains.

It is perplexing that the discourse has revolved around who will join the bank as opposed to what the bank will do, because this bank really could have a revolutionary impact in our region. The modus operandi will be lean, clean and green: lean, with a small and efficient management team of highly skilled and staff; clean, with zero tolerance to corruption and nepotism; and green, with an emphasis on sustainability. We should support the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank because when we are making choices about the kind of global citizen Australia wants to be we need to be thinking about playing a leadership role in our region.

In the previous government Labor commissioned an Asian century white paper, which sought to critically analyse global and regional trends and make long-term leadership commitments in response. Those decisions were political, economic and social and sought to take a long view of history and our region. There is still a copy of that document in my office, but the paper is becoming increasingly hard to find on the internet as the government has sought to purge it from the discourse—sent it down the memory hole. That says a lot about this government and its attempts to stifle the conversation about Australia's role in the region, our obligation to engage and our national interest in engaging.

Australia's future prosperity will correlate with the future prosperity of our neighbours and our region. Put even more simply, we rely on our neighbours' wealth for our own. As the countries of the Indo-Pacific region continue to become more economically entwined, this will only intensify. We can no longer put our hands over our eyes and ignore the changes going on around us. We need to adapt to the changing nature of our region. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank offers immense possibilities for our region. As a country that relies on a strong and prosperous region for our own prosperity, we should support it and engage in shaping its future mission. I commend the bill to the House.

Wyatt Roy (Longman, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015. I think the previous speaker made a very articulate defence of why we should support institutions like the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank, but I wish that members opposite would apply that same logic to the free trade agreement that this government has sealed with China. I think this will lock our two nations together in a pathway towards future prosperity. If the logic of the previous speaker could be applied to all members when it comes to that agreement, I think that our country's future prosperity could be assured.

I have spoken many times before in this place about our nation's changing economic profile, about the need to look beyond the farm gate or the mine head, if we are to continue the trajectory of almost a quarter of a century of uninterrupted economic growth. Critical to the new order is that our country's future economic prosperity will depend on our relationship with an emergent Asian middle class of more than a billion people. They will want to buy our goods and services, so it is imperative that we are opening ourselves to those markets and cultivating access for our exporters.

However, for the Asia-Pacific region to become fully realised as the 21st century's economic powerhouse, one glaring deficiency must be not only addressed but prioritised. There is an acute shortfall in the region's funding reserves for major infrastructure. It is estimated to be as much as $8 trillion.

With this bill, Australia openly declares its hand—to lend a hand. We want to see the Asian economy get the fiscal injection it needs in order to grow. We want to create opportunities for the region—and by extension, for Australia—through helping to fund transport, energy and water infrastructure; by investing in Asian ports, logistics, environmental protection, information and communications technology and agriculture.

The reason is plain, unavoidable reality as much as any strategic drive. The current nexus between Australia's prosperity and economic growth and that of Asia will intensify to an almost unbreakable bond. A stronger Asia will underpin a stronger Australian economy. Infrastructure development in the region will provide greater opportunities for our businesses and will increase demand for our services and commodity exports. Ultimately, a deeper relationship with a better equipped and more productive Asian economy means more jobs for all Australians.

This bill represents a significant step in mapping out that future, by enabling Australia to become a founding member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, which is expected to be up and running by the end of this year. This is a global multilateral initiative with more than 50 member nations involved. China is the largest of the bank's shareholders, with a 30.34 per cent stake. Australia will have the sixth-largest share. Our contribution of about $932 million in paid-in capital to the AIIB over five years has been determined only after extensive due diligence and satisfaction that the bank will be based on world's best practice.

The membership has drawn widely from inside and outside Asia, from South Korea and India to France, Germany and the United Kingdom. We are in very good company. While there have been some reported concerns around governance, we have not joined the newest international bank on the block lightly. All members will absolutely be involved in the bank's direction and decision making. Transparency will be key.

The construction of new ports and railways in AIIB member countries such as India, Indonesia and Korea will mean Australia's exports can reach new and expanding markets. Building a coal unloader at an Indian port will create extra capacity for Australian commodity exporters. Constructing a new railway in Indonesia will help shift Australian wheat and beef to that market. The bank will also build roads and construct telephone and internet lines, among a shopping list of infrastructure improvements.

I am in no doubt that the AIIB will fuel demand for services, which take up an ever-increasing share of our export market and, as such, our national wealth. In particular, we will see demand grow for the expertise we can offer in engineering, construction, management, finance and consultancy. Currently the service sector represents 80 per cent of our domestic economy but only 17 per cent of our exports. Free trade agreements recently sealed by the coalition government will allow those service industries the unprecedented access to overseas markets that they need in order to grow. That includes the landmark free trade agreement with our biggest trading partner, China—an agreement that is now built upon by Australian and Chinese founding membership in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.

With the tapering of demand for our resources and the swelling middle class of our Asian neighbours, services and experiences can become the powerhouse industries exporting to our region and employing our citizens. I am resolute in my conviction about this. No greater opportunity exists than in the tech space. If Asia is to forge, through AIIB investment, massive improvements in communication networks, we need to be there to capitalise on the explosion in innovative industries that will surely occur. We need to seize this moment now. For our economy's future health—and I believe it is as stark as that—we need to foster a start-up ecosystem of innovation which supports the next generation of entrepreneurs. Developing it will take a co-ordinated approach across government, the higher education sector and capital investment, and will involve a real cultural shift in this country.

ABS data underscores how a new approach is needed by government to reverse a trend against risk and entrepreneurship which is particularly worrying for young Australians. In 1997, nine per cent of employed Australians aged 15 to 34 owned their own business. By 2013, the number had diminished to 8.3 per cent. But in the right environment young Australians will find the confidence to start their own businesses, grow the economy and create thousands of new jobs. The nation has the fundamental components, with deep reserves of young, bright, talented Australians and other young international entrepreneurs set to be lured by our unique lifestyle.

Finally, we are perfectly placed at the heart of a growing Asia—which is the focus of this bill—to become an epicentre of global entrepreneurship. The startup economy, the PricewaterhouseCoopers study commissioned by Google Australia, showed that high-growth technology companies could contribute four per cent of GDP, or $109 billion, and add 540,000 jobs to the Australian economy by 2033 from a base of only 0.2 per cent today. In a recent speech to the Australian Institute of Company Directors, CSIRO chairman and former Australian of the Year, Simon McKeon, spoke passionately about a new innovation culture that should permeate business and government. He encapsulated it as an essential change in mindset, attitude and culture.

While entrepreneurial spirit has always been accepted in Australia, now it needs to be championed by government, which must step up as part of a collaboration with business, science and education. Our Chief Scientist, Ian Chubb, agrees, pointing out that while Australia has the same proportion of research scientists per capita in the workforce as the United States, only a third of them are in the private sector. In the US the opposite applies, with a premium in innovation, commercialisation and entrepreneurship. In Israel we see what is achievable. A small country under constant threat with no natural resources, it produces more start-up businesses than Japan, India, Korea, Canada and the UK, and it claims more companies on the NASDAQ than Korea, Japan, Singapore, China, India and all of Europe combined.

Successful governments stir an infectious entrepreneurial spirit, building direct partnerships with the private sector that attract capital for the commercialisation of great ideas. Put simply, they have made it as easy as possible to start and run a new business. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank will show us what is possible, for it will work to the very same principles: harnessing private sector investment and cofunding projects with other development banks and private sector financiers. As the Treasurer enunciated in his second reading speech, this is not a development bank but a bank that funds development. Australian companies will be able to bid for AIIB financed projects as the bank will have an open procurement model. But while it is vital investment, our AIIB commitment will not come at the cost of other government spending. There will be no direct impact on the budget bottom line.

Nobody can deny that Australia will face many challenges in the future. However, I believe we should also be infinitely optimistic about our potential for prosperity, not because of the resources we have in our ground but in light of the innovative capacity of our people. If we embrace our cultural heritage of 'having a go', if we look not in but out to our regional neighbours for the prospects of growth—theirs and ours—we will, as the new Asian middle class rises, be in a position to meet its demand for our food, education, health and innovative and entrepreneurial services. Our Asian neighbours will see doors open as a result of new and enhanced infrastructure across the region. They will walk through them to us. They will want to travel here and invest in our services. Their prosperity is our prosperity. That is the future, which is why I wholeheartedly support our membership of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and this bill to implement our obligations under the bank's articles of agreement. I commend the bill to the House.

Matt Williams (Hindmarsh, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I support the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015 and endorse the comments by the member for Longman, especially those regarding the new economy and the opportunities that the new economy presents, whether that be in entrepreneurship, start-ups or the digital age, and we know from history that those in Asia have done very well in this space. If we look back over the last 20 or 30 years at the Japanese and their companies in the electronics and information technology sectors, whether that be Sony, Nintendo, Panasonic, and at the South Koreans in recent decades and companies like LG and Samsung, they have been world leaders in adapting and innovating in the new economy. We must not forget that these companies started as small companies before they became large companies. This is why the package that the government announced just recently to assist start-ups with the employee ownership scheme, crowd funding and other initiatives will help Australian start-ups to better integrate into the world economy.

As we know, Australia's prosperity and economic growth are closely tied to the Asian region. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015 enables Australia to become a founding member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and puts Australia in a position to influence the bank's decisions and strategic direction. Australia will be the sixth largest shareholder, contributing approximately $1 billion paid-in capital to the AIIB over five years. Our membership provides an opportunity to further strengthen our engagement with the entire Asian region, which is the fastest growing region in the world and includes China, our largest trading partner.

Our relationship with China is essential to growing Australia's economy and creating jobs for all Australians. Annually this relationship is estimated to be worth $150 billion in two-way trade. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015 is further evidence of the coalition government's work to ensure the Australia-China bilateral relationship continues to deliver economic benefits. It also shows Australia working with China at a diplomatic and strategic level so that it engages in the international rules based system. The government is working with China to ensure the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank has the appropriate levels of governance, accountability and transparency expected of a multilateral bank of this kind. The government's negotiations resulted in a commitment that the bank will be based on world's best practice that ensures all members will be involved in the direction and decision making of the bank—vitally important governance arrangements.

Becoming a founding member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank will allow a deepening of our relationships with other member countries, including New Zealand, Singapore and Vietnam, among others. Ultimately, expanding our relationships with these countries will result in job creation for all Australians. This is one of the key reasons why I welcome the coalition's strategic achievements in Asia, including the free trade agreements with China, Korea and Japan. The bank will boost economic growth, create jobs and promote trade in our region by financing much-needed infrastructure investment.

We know that combined investment by countries can have a profound impact. For example, if we review history, the collective efforts to rebuild Germany and Europe after World War II through the European Recovery Program, or the Marshall Plan as it was more commonly known, provided access to credit and infrastructure investment. The United States oversaw the European recovery in partnership with countries like the United Kingdom. This sped up the German and European reconstruction considerably and enabled the growth that Europe has experienced and appreciated over the last half century. In the current context, Asia faces a major infrastructure shortfall as countries in the region industrialise and develop. Australia has the capacity to be a major beneficiary of the much-needed infrastructure investment in Asia. Therefore, it is in our economic interests that we participate in building this infrastructure through the bank.

Recently I spoke with Coffey International, who have major operations in Australia, and in particular in my home city of Adelaide. I asked for their input regarding the development in the Asia-Pacific, and in particular the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Coffey's Asia-Pacific General Manager, Ben Ward, commented:

Investment in infrastructure is a key step in the economic development of a country—with access to reliable roads, rail and ports greatly increasing a country's ability to become a trading partner. Mechanisms such as an international investment bank, as long as they are models of good governance, which prioritise enabling the business and trade environment, can therefore become an important partner in the country's development journey.

The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank will invest in areas such as transport, energy and water infrastructure, ports, logistics, environmental protection, information and communications technology, and agriculture. By improving infrastructure throughout the Asian region, greater opportunities will open up for Australian businesses like Coffey and increase demand for our services and commodity exports. Our services industry has benefited greatly from the development of Asia, and in particular China, and has serviced the resources and minerals sectors of those growing economies. Companies like WorleyParsons, Parsons Brinckerhoff, Sinclair Knight Merz, Jacobs—the list goes on—have grown considerably on the back of the resources and energy sector that has supplied the growing demand from Asia for our products.

Australian firms will be well placed to benefit from infrastructure projects in the region in other areas too, whether they be engineering, construction management, finance or consultancy. New ports and railways in countries such as India, Indonesia and Korea will mean that Australia's exports can now reach new markets. Take agriculture as an example. If we can get better access through new ports, better railways and better transport corridors in Indonesia, we can get far more of our agriculture to market in that country, which has about 200 million people and a growing economy.

As Asia develops, a middle class emerges, creating new demand for all that Australia has to offer. As we have seen with the burgeoning middle class of China, this demand expands to education, health services and tourism—all areas where Australia is fundamentally strong. Unquestionably, by making this decision to join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the parliament is facilitating the growth of Australian jobs and growth of the economy, and that is why I support this bill.

Angus Taylor (Hume, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have often spoken in this place about the huge market opportunities to our north. There is no doubt that Asia is where the action is for Australian exporters. Our introduction of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015 into the House a week ago is another sign of the commitment of this government to make sure that those markets open up as quickly as possible, as effectively as possible and as profitably as possible for our exporters and for our country.

As the Treasurer outlined in his speech when he introduced the bill, Asia faces a massive infrastructure financing gap. It is estimated to be over US$8 trillion over the next decade. This bank is designed to help address that infrastructure financing gap. Australia will be a founding member, and this will help to fund those major new infrastructure projects. I will come back and talk more about the detail of those benefits to Australia in moment.

The decision to join the bank followed extensive consultations with key partners inside the Asian region and outside as well. Australia has negotiated our participation in the design of the bank with more than 50 other prospective founding member countries. These negotiations have resulted in a commitment that the bank will be based on world's best practice. It is critical that the governance of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank be best practice, transparent and effective. All members will be involved in the direction and decision making of the bank. As one of the largest regional shareholders of the bank, Australia will be able to influence the decisions and strategic direction of the bank, and that will be extremely important to not only the effectiveness of the bank itself but to ensuring that benefits flow to Australian exporters and Australia more broadly. Australia will lead a constituency on the bank's board of directors. This is very important because we want that board to be best practice in the way it is put together and the way it works. Negotiations on the composition of this constituency with established partners in the region are well advanced.

Our shareholding with be just under US$4 billion—US$3.7 billion—and our contribution will have zero direct impact on underlying cash balance, fiscal balance and net debt as we are purchasing a shareholding in the bank which has value in itself. This is an extremely important and very positive investment for us which, as I say, will not result in an increase in our net debt position.

The economics of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank are worth dwelling on for a moment. The starting point here is to understand what drives growth in developing countries. In the stage of development we are seeing in Asia, particularly southern Asia—China, India and Indonesia—what drives growth in these countries? There is no shortage of research. There are well-established principles from economic research about what drives growth. Ultimately, it comes down to three things.

The first is infrastructure investment. There is no question that, in the absence of infrastructure investment, you do not see the productivity gains that are necessary to take a country from poverty to lower middle-class to middle-class to the sort of wealth and incomes that we have in Australia today. Infrastructure is absolutely essential.

The second is institutional development. We know that is absolutely critical. This means the development of institutions that are not corrupt, that are transparent, that are accountable and that, therefore, deliver to customers and citizens in a way that may not be the case when a country has very immature institutions. That institutional development is central. We know that, without it, we do not see the sort of growth that we have seen in Australia and throughout the Western world over the last several hundred years.

The third is innovation. That is the area where the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank can do the least. But it must be remembered that innovation in developing countries these days is largely about taking proven ideas from the West and rolling them out in developing countries. That innovation can be aided significantly by well-targeted infrastructure investment.

We know that the economic growth story based on infrastructure, institutions and innovation will have huge benefits for Australia. We have already seen the evidence of that over the last 15 years. When a country goes from an income of about $2,000 per capita up to $10,000 it is in an early stage of growth where much of that growth is driven by physical infrastructure development. That is: engineering construction in bridges, roads, railways and airports; residential construction in housing—in Asia that has largely been apartment based housing; and commercial construction, which is office buildings, shops and so on.

All three of those sorts of developments require large amounts of iron ore and metallurgical coal. They have been extremely profitable exports for Australia, and they will continue to be for many years to come if we continue to see the growth in the early stage of development that we have seen in China reflected not just in the western provinces of China, where it is still continuing today at a rapid rate—about 15 million to 20 million people are being urbanised each year—but also in countries such as Indonesia and India, where we know the infrastructure deficit is absolutely enormous.

The other export that benefits hugely from that shift from $2,000 per capita to $10,000 is copper. We are a significant producer of copper here in Australia. Copper goes into homes and appliances, and there is heavy use of it in that early stage of development. As we move up from $10,000 per capita to $20,000 per capita or higher we see a shift in demand.

There are two areas in particular where we stand to benefit enormously if we can support growth. The first is food. While someone on an income of a couple of thousand dollars per year will tend to eat carbohydrates, as they move up to $10,000 or $20,000 a year in income, they will shift their diet towards proteins, oils, sugar and fruit and vegetables. We stand to gain enormously as China moves into that zone in the next couple of years. It is happening now. We also stand to gain enormously as other countries throughout the region—such as Indonesia and India—start moving up towards that level where their consumption of food shifts from staple carbohydrates. We gain benefits from the staple carbohydrates, but we will shift to much greater benefits as they move to protein, sugar, oils and fruit and vegetables.

Each country throughout Asia is at a different stage in their development. Of course, Korea and Japan are furthest advanced. That is why they provide such great opportunities for us in food exports. China is well back, but even further back is India. With a population of well over a billion people, India offers us enormous prospects, as does Indonesia.

Given that story, it is critical, from our point of view, that we see the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank focus on investment in the infrastructure and institutional development that is going to allow that rapid growth of income per person in the coming years throughout the countries of Asia.

Within that context, the free trade agreements that we have negotiated with Japan, Korea and—of course, the big one—China are enormously important. In the mining boom clearly much of the benefit came without additional free trade agreements. The most important free trade agreement we had was on iron ore with the Japanese in opening up the Pilbara in the 1960s. We did not need new free trade agreements for massive growth in our exports of iron ore, coal and copper over recent years, but we do for food. We absolutely need these free trade agreements to tap into that food opportunity that we see coming at us at a rapid rate.

Those opposite—and I know it is not all of them—who blockade and get in the way of these free trade agreements needs to eyeball every one of those farmers who are increasing their income through feeding Asia. This is, quite seriously, the worst piece of economic vandalism I have seen. Australia has not gone down this path of looking inwards for a long, long time. In fact, Hawke and Keating, to their credit, were extraordinary leaders in this country in opening up the country to exports, and what we are seeing from those opposite is a turnaround, a change, as they become subservient to a union movement that does not care about the interest of the average Australian and certainly does not care about the farmers of Australia. I will not stand for it. I will work closely with the farmers of Australia to make sure the CFMEU's scare campaign based on absolute lies is revealed for what it really is, which is an attempt by those opposite to get into power at the expense of Australia's long-term interest, short-term interest and medium-term interest, and the interest of every Australian who works hard every day to export products into Asian countries that desperately need our food.

Closer to home, I was extremely privileged to welcome the Prime Minister, the trade minister and the agriculture minister to a property at Yass in my electorate yesterday. Bellevale is owned by Brendan and Rowena Abbey. They are local cattle producers and they are enjoying great success producing beef cattle for live export to China. The Abbeys have been exporting Angus heifers to China for four years, many grown on their Yass property. They stand, as so many farmers do, to benefit greatly from the China free trade agreement. And so they should, because this is an opportunity for Australian farmers the likes of which I have not seen in my lifetime—and I will not stand for the CFMEU getting between us and that opportunity. In the words of trade minister, Andrew Robb:

The kind of investment the Abbeys are putting in to their business is a great sign of the return of confidence in the rural sector—their cattle have gone up in value every month for the past seven or eight months. The Free Trade Agreement with China will be fundamental to their success and the success of thousands of farmers—

tens of thousands of farmers—

in all sorts of areas of agriculture.

Australia is poised on the edge of an opportunity that we have not seen since the 19th century. Those opposite are in the way. It is time for us to stand up for Australia's long-term prosperity, its medium-term prosperity and the short-term benefit of every Australian citizen by saying, 'We will not accept what they are attempting to do.' The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is an important part of encouraging growth and wealth creation in Asia that will benefit all of us. I strongly commend this bill to the House.

Luke Simpkins (Cowan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I welcome this unexpected but great opportunity to speak today on this bill, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015. I do not think there is any doubt that this country sees its future with the best possible involvement in Asia, with its developing markets, the developing middle class that we hear so much about and the scale of humanity looking for the goods and services that this country can provide. This is in many ways the niche that this country—this small country by comparison—can fill through its trade arrangements. I said 'goods and services'. It is not just iron ore and gas; it is a wide range of services beyond that; it is our agriculture as well, of course. This is about the opportunities ahead, and I welcome the fact that the government and the minister have embraced this opportunity to participate as part of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.

I also welcome the way it was done. These are not things to be rushed into. These are not things to just blindly jump into. Things need to be assessed. There needs to be appropriate consideration of the ramifications. Obviously, around the world not everyone was in favour of this, and so I think it was very wise that we did not just jump in. We gave it due consideration and we came to the view in the end that it was the right thing to do. It was the right thing to do because this dovetails so well into the government's efforts with regard to free trade agreements. We have a great future for Australian jobs that will be developed out of the China free trade agreement, the agreement with Japan and the South Korean free trade agreement.

But, beyond these major trading partners, who will become even more important and will help contribute to the prosperity of this country and the lives and the jobs of Australians in the future, precisely in this case, with the development of infrastructure throughout South Asia, South-East Asia and beyond, the benefits will come from exactly this sort of investment. We want to be able to have the same trade opportunities that we have with China, Japan and South Korea for the future. The investment we make is an investment as much for the future of Asia as for the future of Australians. There are children being born right now in this country whose future employment prospects will absolutely depend and be benefited by the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and, of course, by the efforts of this government with regard to the Chinese free trade agreement and, as I said, the South Korea and Japan free trade agreements. We look forward to more and more opportunities of this kind; there is no doubt about it.

Yesterday, when debate resumed on this bill, I had the unfortunate experience of having to listen to the contribution by the shadow Treasurer, raving in a strident and grating manner about how quickly the opposition jumped on board with the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. He derided the Treasurer for the accurate claim—but he still derided him—that the Treasurer had been the first one to sign. So that there is no doubt: was the Treasurer the first to sign? Yes, he was. Any allegation to the contrary is completely false.

Unfortunately, there was more than just that to the shadow Treasurer's contribution. It was tragic, really, to see the shadow Treasurer talking all about this bill and avoiding at all possible cost any mention of the Chinese free trade agreement. But we need to see these things in the larger context. The Chinese free trade agreement is very important to this country, and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and other outcomes of this bill will be important for the future of this country—and they dovetail. There is no doubt about it.

But we do not have a clear line from the other side of this House on the Chinese free trade agreement. Personally, I suspect they are against it because their pre-selectors, the people who tell Labor candidates whether they get to stay in the seats they have been selected for, like the CFMEU and other unions, make those decisions. They are the key players in that matter. So the view of those opposite on the free trade agreement is unclear. I am sure they are just being given their instructions, their orders, by the people who are influential in their preselections. That is, unfortunately, always the way of the Labor Party.

On this side, we know that the Chinese free trade agreement is good for this country. We reject the lies told by the CFMEU, Get Up! and other left-wing partisan organisations, because we know that in the future the benefits for this country will be great and the benefits for future generations will be great. As the father of two girls I look forward to being able to give them better job opportunities, through the Chinese free trade agreement and through the benefits to this nation of trade in the region provided by the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. I look forward to those opportunities being there for my children and their children and, of course, everybody in this country—the children of today and future generations of Australians. It is the duty of this place to deliver the best possible future for Australians, not just think of the here and now, not just think of the short-term preselection opportunities, as one side of this House does, but think about what is at stake and what opportunities there are.

I want to see growth in the agricultural sector. I want to see growth in manufacturing. I want to see growth in shipbuilding in this country, as well. In Western Australia, we have a most excellent organisation, a most excellent business, Austal, that does great work in the construction of ships, not just here in this country but also at their works in Alabama. On that side of things, the government have another good story to tell. We are in the business of providing a great future for shipbuilding in this country. Whereas those opposite, during their six years in government, did nothing but export shipbuilding to other countries, we actually believe in it. So it is good that, through Austal and other shipbuilders in other places around this country, the future of shipbuilding is locked in, and it is locked in because of the efforts of this government. I applaud that and I look forward to seeing more and more jobs, and jobs for the future, for Australians.

It is not just about the shipbuilding. It is also about the goods and services, such as providing aged-care services in the future in the region. There are so many chances for us to make good decisions so that Australians can fully participate in exporting to and interacting with Asia. We need the best, most positive attitude towards our neighbours. We have to believe in them as they believe in us and we have to be prepared to negotiate and work with them. Bills such as this one and the Chinese free trade agreement are acknowledgements of mutual respect and the interdependent trade relationship between us and our great trading partners, even future trading partners in Asia.

It is often said in this place that national security is the first priority of any government, and I think that is absolutely true. But we must also look to a prosperous future for this country. The free trade agreements that have been so successfully negotiated by this government, through the great work of the minister for trade; and, now, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank highlight such opportunities and are the right decisions for this country. I very much look forward to those benefits flowing down to our children and future generations for a much better and economically stronger Australia.

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a great pleasure to follow the member for Cowan, the member for Hindmarsh, the member for Banks, the member for Barton and the member for Hume, who have spoken on the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill 2015 for the coalition this morning. I would like to associate myself with all their comments. I would like to add a few other points on why Australia being part of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is most important.

Back in 2013 the World Bank, which for decades had been financing infrastructure in many of the poorer Third World countries on this planet, made the decision that they would no longer fund coal fired power stations in developing countries. This was a most disgraceful decision. It has condemned millions of citizens in the Third World to poverty and a premature death. Unless there is no equal or superior alternative to a coal fired power station, the World Bank, by denying the funding to people in the Third World, have simply condemned millions to a premature death. This is a life-and-death issue. I would like to read into Hansard a story about why funding for coal fired power stations is important—something that the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank will likely do. This is a passage by a lady called Kathryn Hall and it is called 'Kathryn's Story'. It is in 'Power Up Gambia'. This is an example of what happens when rich Western countries decide to deny countries in the Third World cheap, reliable sources of power:

At 4 p.m. on a Saturday afternoon, I was startled when the lights came on; the lights never came on after 2 p.m. on the weekends. The adrenaline really kicked in when I was invited to observe an emergency cesarean section - a first for me. When the infant emerged I felt my heart racing from excitement and awe!

But no matter how many times the technician suctioned out the nose and mouth, the infant did not utter a sound. After twenty five minutes the technician and nurse both gave up. The surgeon later explained that the baby had suffocated in utero. If only they had had enough power to use the ultrasound machine for each pregnancy, he would have detected the problem earlier and been able to plan the C-section. Without early detection, the C-section became an emergency, moreover, the surgery had to wait for the generator to be powered on. The loss of precious minutes meant the loss of a precious life. At that time, in that place, all I could do was cry.

And later, when the maternity ward was too hushed, I cried again. A full-term infant was born weighing only 3.5 pounds. In the U.S., the solution would have been obvious and effective: incubation. But without reliable electricity, the hospital did not even contemplate owning an incubator. This seemingly simple solution was not available to this newborn girl, and she perished needlessly.

Reliable electricity is at the forefront of every staff members' thoughts. With it, they can conduct tests with electrically powered medical equipment, use vaccines and antibiotics requiring refrigeration, and plan surgeries to meet patient's needs. Without it, they will continue to give their patients the best care available, but in a country with an average life expectancy of only 54 years of age, it's a hard fight to win.

That is why we should be supporting the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. They will break the policies of the World Bank and they will loan for coal fired power stations in the Third World. If there is any doubt about this, I refer you to an article written by an Indian gentleman, Rupa Subramanya, at foreignpolicy.com. Under the heading 'Is the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Good for India?' he writes:

The AIIB aims to supplant or at least challenge … the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). For India, in particular, AIIB may have a significant impact on the energy choices available, by lifting Western-imposed constraints on how the World Bank lends.

…   …   …

… the AIIB, if it takes off, could power billions of dollars of much needed infrastructure development throughout the region.

…   …   …

… in a … economic sense, the … AIIB … may well be beneficial for India. The crux is coal.

  …   …   …

One of the reasons India has embraced the AIIB is almost surely the fact that the country hopes to receive development finance for its coal-powered electricity generation. The Indian government has indicated it would like to increase renewable energy capacity, but it has reiterated that, to meet the country's development needs, coal-fired power generation will have to be significantly stepped up.

It's in India’s interests to use the AIIB to help spur this growth.

That is a fantastic reason why we here in Australia should support the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. There are currently 300 million people in India that have no access to electricity whatsoever. By being able to provide them with access to electricity, we give them an economic opportunity. It is simply immoral for countries in the rich West, where people live an opulent lifestyle because of coal fired power generation and because of our free market capitalist system, to try and deny those same opportunities to people in the Third World. Therefore, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank should take on the World Bank and make sure these vital investments go to people in the Third World and they are given the economic opportunity to advance.

Another reason why Australia being part of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank is important is to do with our relationship with China. That has been a subject in this debate for people on both sides of this House. The Chinese economy is growing every year. Its GDP is growing by almost $1 trillion. We need to have the faith in our Australian businesses, our Australian industries, our Australian people—the confidence in their skills, their abilities, their entrepreneurial 'get up and go'—to go out and to compete and to grab some of that market share. We are not the only country that is trying to export more product into China, but having the free trade agreement puts our exporters and our nation at the forefront.

This is a vital moment in our nation's history. The opportunity for all businesses to leverage into that Chinese market and take advantage of it through the China free trade agreement is an opportunity this nation cannot miss. Yet, in one of the most shameful actions I have ever seen in this nation, the CFMEU and other unions are running around telling nothing other than bald-faced lies about this free trade agreement. This is the most disgraceful and despicable and anti-Australian campaign—a xenophobic campaign—that I have ever seen in my lifetime. What is most disappointing about this is that those on the other side are silent and refuse to condemn it. I see the member for Rankin sitting at the table. I am sure that in his heart of hearts he is ashamed of that CFMEU and union campaign. I am sure in his heart of hearts he knows that we will create more higher paying jobs if this free trade agreement goes ahead and yet, because of their ties to the union movement, members on that side will not stand up and condemn this union activity. I condemn it in this parliament here today. I say it is economic vandalism. I say it is sabotage. I say it is treasonous and against the interests of our nation. I know many of those on the other side of the parliament have to do as they are told by the CFMEU and their union bosses, but I would hope that they have the courage to put the interests of this nation first, to put the interests of jobs first and to put the interests of higher incomes first because those higher incomes are what will help flow extra revenue into the government treasuries that will pay for all our much-needed social services and social security. If you want more money spent on education, if you want more money spent on health, if you want more money spent on our disabled, if you want more money spent on our aged care, the answer is simple—you have to get behind and support free trade. You have to stand up and condemn this CFMEU-led misleading campaign of deception. It is completely against our national interests.

We have seen some of the figures already. In the last several years 100,000 jobs have been created for people involved in direct export to China. This should be the tip of the iceberg. Those of us on both sides come into this parliament and say we want to create more opportunities for people in this country. We say we want to create more jobs and we say we want to create higher-earning jobs. The answer is simple—we need to leverage the opportunities that present themselves in that growing and wealthy region—not only China but also Japan and South Korea, with whom we have also signed free trade agreements. We are on a dangerous path towards our nation's future. We have one road to go down where we can take advantage of these opportunities. We can increase the wealth of this nation, we can increase the number of jobs, or we can go down a dark road of trying to close down our economy to look after the interests of a few union bosses. This is the crossroads we stand at today. I would hope over the next two-week break all good members on the other side of the chamber look into their conscience and stand up against this union campaign. Call it out for what it is—call out the lies, call out the deceptions. If you do, you will be doing your constituents a favour; you will be doing a favour to this Australian nation.

The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank gives us enormous opportunities in many countries other than China. We need to look to the future. We need to look also at what we can export to and how we can increase our trade with the growing economy of India. We have so many close ties with India. The ability of the Australian nation to increase our wealth, to increase our prosperity, through trade with countries like India also cannot be underestimated in any way. Many people in the world live in abject poverty today, throughout South-East Asia and throughout Africa. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, which Australia is part of, will hopefully free up resources, free up dollars, so that these countries can have better infrastructure. We can give these people opportunities because prosperity is an upward spiral. As we have seen with countries like China, as they increase their wealth and prosperity, as they improve their infrastructure, it rebounds to us because they buy more of our goods and services. They are more likely to travel to Australia, so our tourism industry can get greater returns. These are things that we should be encouraging. I hope, as I said, that members on the other side of the chamber have a good look at themselves over the next fortnight and that when they come back to this parliament in a fortnight's time they will call-out this misleading, this deceptive, this treacherous union advertising campaign of falsehoods. We owe that to the Australian people. I commend the bill to the House.

Alannah Mactiernan (Perth, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Labor unequivocally supports the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank Bill. In fact, we were early adopters of this measure so we will not be lectured by that side; they had to be dragged screaming to the table to support it. We want to work with China, we want to work with our Asian neighbours, to ensure that they have the capacity to go forward. But we will not sacrifice Australian jobs and we ask those opposite not to use the label 'xenophobia', not to bandy that around, but to start reading this agreement, start looking at what the consequences of this agreement are. Look at clause 4 of the memorandum of understanding—look at it and understand that what is happening here is a massive change in the landscape for Australia workers.

Craig Kelly (Hughes, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, I ask the member for Perth whether she will accept an intervention

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No. It being 1.30 pm, the debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 43. The debate may be resumed at a later hour and the honourable member will have leave to continue her remarks when the debate is resumed.