Andrew Wilkie (Denison, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. The Van Diemen's Land Company, started in 1824, is the largest dairy asset in Australia. It is owned by New Zealanders and it is up for sale. The owners accepted a bid by a majority Australian consortium committed to producing premium branded dairy products, but that consortium been gazumped by a Chinese bulk commodity enterprise. Prime Minister, will you intervene to ensure this iconic and economically strategic holding is returned to Australian ownership?

Malcolm Turnbull (Wentworth, Liberal Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the honourable member for his question. Given that foreign investment falls within the Treasury portfolio, I will invite the Treasurer to respond.

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Denison for his question. It has been reported that a Supreme Court judge in Victoria has upheld an injunction temporarily halting the sale of Tasmanian dairy business Van Diemen's Land to a foreign buyer. The injunction was brought by an Australian company, TasFoods Ltd, which has reported to the Australian Stock Exchange that a further court hearing will be held on 3 December. Van Diemen's Land has always been in foreign ownership, I am advised, and there are appropriate processes for Australia's foreign investment laws to be upheld and appropriate scrutiny to be applied. The foreign investment rules do provide for Australia's national interest to be protected, and most acquisitions by foreign buyers of agricultural land valued at $15 million or more have to be screened by the Foreign Investment Review Board with the decision ultimately to be taken by the government. In particular, foreign persons must get approval for a proposed acquisition of an interest in agricultural land where the cumulative value of that land owned by the foreign person, including the proposed purchase, is more than $15 million.

In recent days we have seen the passage of further tightenings and appropriate restrictions being placed on how foreign investment is viewed by this government. We take these issues very seriously. We know that Australians put great trust in the Australian government to make decisions about foreign investment and what is allowed and what is not allowed. That is one of the reasons why we have reduced the screening thresholds, particularly as they apply to agricultural land but agribusinesses as well. These changes were opposed by those opposite. I do not know why the changes were opposed; I do not know why those opposite think the Australian people do not want their government to take a close interest in these issues and assess the matters of national interest that apply to them. They had the same view about residential real estate—they were happy for foreign investors to come and buy up residential real estate across the country and have that unchecked. They were happy when they were in government not to put the resources into those issues as well.

Andrew Wilkie (Denison, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order on relevance. The question goes to government intervention above and beyond the Foreign Investment Review Board.

Mr Ewen Jones interjecting—

Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Herbert is warned. The Treasurer is in order. The question was in a number of parts.

Scott Morrison (Cook, Liberal Party, Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government has its processes, we have tightened those processes, the Foreign Investment Review Board reviews these matters when they come before it and it makes recommendations to the government, to me as Treasurer, and then there is further consideration. As the Treasurer I recently made a decision in relation to S. Kidman and Co., which gives an indication of the diligence we apply to these matters, but we also made decisions in relation to TransGrid, where we imposed the tightest conditions on that sale in New South Wales to ensure that the national interest was protected. This government will always ensure the national interest is protected. (Time expired)