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

In my contribution to the debate on the Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2015-2016 and the Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2015-2016, I would like to start by remembering that, this week, we commemorate the 18th anniversary of the passing of the great economist Julian Simon. I will start with two of Julian Simon's quotes. The first is on what our most valuable resource is. He said:

The ultimate resource is people—especially skilled, spirited, and hopeful young people endowed with liberty—who will exert their wills and imaginations for their own benefits, and so inevitably they will benefit the rest of us as well.

Another of Simon's quotes is: 'Our species'—the human species—'is better off in just about every measurable way.' Just about every important long-term measure of human material welfare shows that there has been improvement over the decades and the centuries. Raw materials have become less scarce rather than more. The air in the US and other rich countries is irrefutably safer to breathe. Water cleanliness has improved. The environment is increasingly healthy and there is every prospect that this trend will continue.

I would like to set out the reasons behind Simon's prediction that our air pollution and our environment will continue to improve—by an error of logic that we are currently making here in Australia and that is being made across many parts of the world. When it comes to air pollution, we are actually targeting the wrong enemy. In doing so we are making our air pollution worse and we are taking steps that are costing lives in Australia today. I am talking about the lack of focus in this nation on what is called particulate matter pollution. Particulate matter is the mixture of solid particles or liquid droplets found in the air, such as dust, dirt, soot and smoke—often large enough to be seen by the naked eye. We hear about carbon pollution from many so-called environmentalists and those who supposedly care about the environment. They stand up and they rant and rave about carbon pollution. What they are generally referring to is carbon dioxide—that clear, odourless gas. If the member sitting at the table had sparkling mineral water rather than still water, those little bubbles coming out of it would be carbon dioxide. What I am talking about is the dust, the dirt and the soot that comes out of our diesel trucks, wood fires and also burning coal.

We should be most concerned about this because the World Health Organization has confirmed that fine particulate matter is carcinogenic. It causes cancer. That is the carbon pollution that we should be worried about. The World Health Organization confirmed that it is from diesel exhaust and it causes cancer in humans. They say the decision was unanimous and based on compelling scientific evidence. The pollution they talk about, from diesel trucks, buses and other diesel engines, is technically called 'particulate matter'. This is why we should be concerned.

There was a very interesting paper prepared by the National Environment Protection Council, authored by three most distinguished gentlemen: Associate Professor Geoff Morgan, Dr Richard Broome and Professor Bin Jalaludin. They found that, in 2008, 1,586 deaths were caused by fine particulate matter pollution in Sydney, Melbourne, Perth and Brisbane. That is more than 1,500 people a year who are dying in our major cities from fine particulate matter pollution. And yet we have this irrational concentration on carbon pollution being carbon dioxide. We need to refocus on what is killing people—thousands of Australians every year—and that is the real carbon pollution, which is fine particulate matter.

They also found that the figure of 1,586 deaths is based on an average fine particulate matter reading of 6.7 micrograms per cubic metre. They estimated that if we go from 6.7 to 10 micrograms per cubic metre it would lead to a 48 per cent increase in deaths. That is an extra 760 potential deaths from air pollution in our major cities. If we are to have emissions reduction schemes, they should be focusing on the reduction of emissions of particulate matter first, because that is what is causing deaths in our country today.

The figures for Sydney are just as dramatic. In Sydney, the learned professors and doctors estimated that 520 deaths occurred in the year 2008 based on 6.7 micrograms per cubic metre. The years of life lost are estimated to be 6,300. That is a reduction in longevity of 10 years for those people who died from exposure to fine particulate matter. By focusing our guns on carbon dioxide, we have implemented policies that have pushed up the price of electricity. So when we think that all these renewables are wonderful—which actually push up the price of electricity—what do consumers do?

In Western Sydney, in a cold winter, if a consumer finds that his electricity price is too high, he has options, and one of those options is to light a log fire—to simply burn wood. We know that the burning of wood to heat homes is the largest source of fine particulate matter in Western Sydney. So it comes as no surprise that, if we look at the fine particulate matter readings in Western Sydney, in Liverpool, we see that, since we had these large increases in electricity prices, the levels of fine particulate matter have increased. I note that, for the first time ever, in the last couple of winters there have been companies advertising on the radio selling wood. If you go to any garage in Western Sydney, they have bags of firewood lined up to sell.

So what do we see from the readings at Liverpool? These are the readings in micrograms per cubic metre. In 2010 the annual average in Liverpool was 6.4. In 2011 it was 5.9. These figures can bounce around a little bit, depending on underlying conditions—bushfires and things. But in 2012 we had a jump to 8.5. In 2013 we had a jump to 9.4. In 2014 that high level persisted at 8.6. And in 2015 we were at 8.5. Those levels above eight for Liverpool are actually above the standards that we have recently set through our national air pollution guidelines. We have set a limit: that no Australian should be exposed, on an annual average basis, to any greater than eight micrograms per cubic metre. Yet in Liverpool, for all of the last four years, coinciding exactly with the increase in electricity prices, we have been above that level of eight.

If we continue on the rate that we are going, as shown in this report, as the learned professors have said, and if we lift the level from that 6.7 average up to 10, we are going to get a 48 per cent increase in deaths from fine particulate matter, from lung cancer and cardiovascular disease, in Western Sydney. We should be declaring a national emergency over this. There are more deaths from this than from the road toll. Yet this is something we can do something about. We should divert some of the funds—the multiple billions of dollars' worth of funds—that we are putting into reducing emissions of carbon dioxide and put those funds into reducing emissions of particulate matter, because particulate matter kills and it kills thousands of people across Australia. It kills over 500 people a year in Sydney.

That brings me to the intermodal project—one of the most flawed and poorly-thought-out pieces of infrastructure in our country at the moment. What they are proposing is this wonderful plan: 'Let's take the containers off the road and put them onto rail.' That's wonderful! But what happens? On the current locomotive fleet that we have transporting or shuttling containers around Sydney on that Southern Sydney Freight Line, there are no pollution controls whatsoever. So if you take a litre of diesel fuel that you would have burnt in a modern truck engine—a post-2007 truck engine; almost any truck that is less than 10 years old—and you burn that litre of diesel fuel in one of these locomotives, you will get something like 20-plus times more particulate matter spewed into the atmosphere. And that is the plan of the so-called environmentalists: 'Isn't this wonderful! We're going to take the containers off the road and put them on trucks.' That plan is flawed anyway, but I do not have the time to go into that. But they are saying: 'It is wonderful! We will produce less CO2 because we will need less diesel fuel because steel on steel, on the rails, is more effective than rubber on the road.' And yes, you will get a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by doing that, but this plan will see an increase in particulate matter, not of 10 per cent, not 50 per cent but 1,000 per cent. For every container that we move from Port Botany out to Moorebank in Western Sydney, we are going to have a 1,000 per cent increase in particulate matter—a carcinogen that kills people—when we are already at a level above our national standard. That should not be an option.

If we are going to do this—if this is such a wonderful plan—then we must implement pollution control standards on those diesel locomotives that travel through our cities. There should be no alternative. They should have exactly the same pollution controls as trucks. Otherwise, it is completely counterproductive to try to do what is planned with the intermodal project. So I call on our environmental ministers, state and federal, to get together and introduce the protection standards on diesel— (Time expired)

Andrew Leigh (Fraser, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

At the outset, can I thank the member for Hughes for taking the jump due to my not being in the chamber at the exactly right moment. I very much enjoyed listening to his discourse on particulate matter—

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

As always!

Andrew Leigh (Fraser, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

as always.

It will please the House, I am sure, to know that the opposition does not intend to block supply. We will support the appropriation bills, which, combined, appropriate an additional $2.2 billion for the 2015-16 financial year, largely to reflect measures in the 2015-16 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook, as well as machinery-of-government changes resulting from the leadership change last year.

The 2015-16 MYEFO was released on 15 December last year, passing largely unnoticed. But those who were following it would have noticed that the deficit was again up. The deficit blew out by $26 billion over the forward estimates—a blowout of $120 million a day between the 2015-16 budget and the 2015-16 MYEFO. Most economists would not regard the No. 1 test of economic management as being a government's ability to deliver razor-thin surpluses. That is why independent economists would not generally regard a Treasurer like Peter Costello as being Australia's best ever Treasurer. Certainly, that is reflected in the fact that poor old Peter never managed to get the Euromoney award, unlike treasurers Keating and Swan.

The coalition before the election did make clear that they thought that debt and deficits were the signal test of economic leadership, so we need to assess them on that test. On that basis, net debt for 2016-17 is nearly $100 billion higher than forecast in the 2013 Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Outlook. Gross debt headed to $550 billion by the end of the forward estimates. The Pre-election Economic and Fiscal Outlook, prepared independently by the secretaries of Treasury and Finance during the election period, had the budget returning to surplus at the end of the forward estimates period. Now the budget is not forecast to return to surplus until 2020-21, largely on the back of bracket creep. Most of the work of returning the budget to surplus is due to bracket creep. Of course, if the Treasurer gets his way and is able to prevent bracket creep occurring, it is entirely possible that the return to surplus stage could blow out even further still, past 2020-21.

The economic context for all of this is absolutely critical. We need strong productivity growth in Australia in order to sustain living standards. Productivity growth in the years since the global financial crisis, in labour productivity terms, has been 2.4 per cent, which is around the level of the last 40 years—2.3 per cent. Labour productivity growth in the period since the global financial crisis has not been bad, but the question that many independent economists are asking is: where will the productivity growth of the future come from? A glass half full person might well point to some of the stimulatory factors: an Australian dollar at 70 US cents stimulating our exporters; the lowest global interest rates, if you believe in analysis by the Bank of England, in 5,000 years, stimulating businesses that seek to borrow; oil sitting at around $30 a barrel, which is good for manufacturers and transport-intensive industries; and other potentially positive signs—bipartisan interest in innovation, for one.

But there is a range of concerns on the horizon. Net disposable income per capita has been falling for six consecutive quarters. We often make the mistake in this country of thinking that GDP is our best proxy for living standards. It is not. GDP is adjusted to account for inflation, but it is not adjusted to account for population growth. Given that Australia over the last decade has been enjoying more rapid population growth than any other country in the OECD, failing to adjust for population growth is going to skew the metrics of living standards. Adjusting also for income accruing to foreign shareholders gives you a more precise measure of living standards. Net disposable income per capita is a measure which I believe we ought to be paying considerable attention to in Australia. That is now down two per cent since 2013. Real living standards are down two per cent since the coalition government took office.

We have had a huge share market shock this year. The earnings outlook in the Australian share market is now lower than the earnings outlook on the British stock market, the US stock market or the Japanese stock market. ASX dividend payout ratios are now above 60 per cent. We want companies to be paying out dividends, but to be paying dividends of such scale suggests a degree of timidity among boards as to their potential for making productive investments. Geopolitical concerns are everywhere from the South China Sea to the Middle East. There is significantly higher inequality with inequality now sitting at about a 75-year high in Australia. We have the highest carbon emissions per person in the advanced world and there is too little innovation. Just six per cent of ASX 300 firms say that Australia is a 'highly innovative' nation. We need more innovation if we are to enjoy that long run of productivity growth.

We have had capital expenditure falling. The latest data from September 2015 showed the worst quarterly fall since records began in 1987. This is not just a drop in mining capital expenditure, which all of us expected to decline as we moved from the construction to the production phase of the mining boom; capital expenditure is falling right across the economy. This is entirely at odds with what we were led to expect when the coalition government won office. Former Prime Minister Abbott used to say that he would be an 'infrastructure Prime Minister' and yet we have had steady falls in public sector capital investment growth. We have consumer and business confidence far lower than when the Abbott-Turnbull government took office. Consumer confidence on the Westpac measure is eight per cent lower than it was in the 2013 election. The NAB business confidence measure is 10 points lower than at the 2013 federal election. The transition from the mining boom and the fall in commodity prices are reflected in the budget, but we do not see from this government a clear plan to deal with that. If Peter Costello can deal with an Asian financial crisis and Wayne Swan can deal with a global financial crisis, surely this government can deal with commodity prices being back where they were in the mid-2000s.

The 2015-16 Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook also contained some new measures with which Labor has serious concerns. They include cuts to diagnostic imaging and pathology services, yet another instance of a coalition government keen to attack Medicare. We know the coalition have wanted to disband Medicare for many, many years. Elections from 1969 to 1993 were fought over sustaining Medicare. But then, ever since, at every turn the coalition have looked for ways to undermine and degrade Medicare. The 2015-16 MYEFO also locked in a range of budget decisions with which Labor has serious concerns—imposing $100,000 degrees on university students, increasing the cost of pharmaceuticals, raising the pension age to 70, calling parents 'rorters' and 'double dippers', cutting back on paid parental leave and $80 billion of cuts to schools and hospitals.

Labor have put forward a positive plan: a higher education policy that does not involve six-figure degrees; proposals to increase the number of students engaged in science, technology, engineering and mathematics; a suite of innovation policies which increase the pool of investment that is available for innovative firms; provide an entrepreneur's year for talented university graduates wanting to start a business; and funding the 'Your child. Our Future' plan, an investment to fully fund years 5 and 6 of the Gonski school reforms at a cost of $4½ billion and total provision of $37 billion over the decade.

We do this not because we believe that simply spending more money will invariably raise results but because we know that money spent in the right way will be able to get us past the educational challenges that Australia faces. Few countries in the world have gone backwards in PISA tests, but Australia has gone backwards in science, reading and mathematics. This is deeply concerning to those of us on this side of the House. We realise that proper funding is a key instrument in ensuring that our schools can attract and retain great teachers. Teacher quality is at the heart of our productivity agenda and innovation agenda and should be supported by all those on both sides of the House. Our agenda reflects the necessity of making sure we have great teachers in all schools.

We have other policies to fund our commitments. Labor have plans that have been costed by the independent Parliamentary Budget Office, the most rigorous independent costing authority in the nation. These policies ensure making multinationals pay their fair share of tax—

Kelly O'Dwyer (Higgins, Liberal Party, Minister for Small Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You opposed it.

Andrew Leigh (Fraser, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

rather than just talking about multinationals, not just coming up with thought bubbles, such as suggesting, 'Maybe we'll pay employees to snitch on their bosses,' but costed policies that will add to the budget bottom line. I heard the Assistant Treasurer at the table suggesting that somehow Labor opposed the coalition's uncosted multinational tax plan. We said on budget night that we would support it despite the fact that it had asterisks where the budget numbers should have been and despite the fact that when we asked the question, 'How much revenue will it raise?' the answer from the Assistant Treasurer and her colleagues was, 'Meh. We do not know. We've just got asterisks. That's the best we can do.' But we said we would support their plan. We only said that we wanted to ensure that there was tax transparency and that we thought it was appropriate for Australians to know how much tax big companies had paid.

Nick Champion (Wakefield, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You had to rely on the Greens.

Kelly O'Dwyer (Higgins, Liberal Party, Minister for Small Business) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We did. We had to rely on the Greens.

Andrew Leigh (Fraser, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Treasurer) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In the end, as the Assistant Treasurer has acknowledged, the government had to do a deal with the Greens. They did a deal with the Greens to wind back tax transparency. Labor had always supported the government's multinational tax bill. We did not think it was as good as our proposal. Frankly, if you simply looked at how much the two would raise, you had $7.2 billion versus 'Meh.' But we said we would support theirs. We simply thought that good laws needed to be accompanied by transparency and a well-resourced tax office. Instead, the government cut 4,700 jobs from the tax office.

Labor have also put forward careful plans on high-income superannuation. Unlike the government, which seems to think that it is okay having superannuation tax concessions increasing at four times the rate of the age pension, Labor believe that our superannuation tax concessions are not fair and are not sustainable. People in Australia with many millions in superannuation are receiving a bigger super tax concession than someone on the full-rate pension. It just is not fair that someone with multimillions in super is getting more government assistance than a full-rate pensioner.

Labor have proposed increasing the tobacco excise, a measure which would both add to the budget bottom line and have a health benefit. We proposed scrapping the Emissions Reduction Fund. We opposed the return of the baby bonus, which is a sop to the Nationals without strong economics behind it. Labor also oppose a costly marriage equality plebiscite, a position which was held by now Prime Minister Turnbull just before he won the leadership. A couple of years ago, Prime Minister Turnbull was critical of the Emissions Reduction Fund. He has been critical of a marriage equality plebiscite. But he has now flipped his position in order to maintain support in the party room.

I would be remiss if I did not say a few words about the particular impact of this government's decisions on the nation's capital. We read in the papers today about three major body blows being inflicted on Canberra as a result of the government's decision to move the Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation and to move staff from the Grains Research and Development Corporation. The decision to take these core staff out of the nation's capital again reflects this government's propensity to pork-barrel with Public Service jobs.

Through the Senate estimates process, we have heard of the impact on Canberra of the cuts to six national cultural institutions. I commend my Senate colleagues for extracting this information; it is like pulling teeth, but they have gotten that information for the public. These cuts, which amount to some $20 million over four years, affect the National Museum of Australia, the National Portrait Gallery, the Museum of Australian Democracy, the National Film and Sound Archive, the National Gallery of Australia, and the National Library. All of these institutions will have to find that money through job cuts and changes to operations.

The Museum of Australian Democracy director Daryl Karp has said:

We've cut fat, we've cut muscle, now we've got to look at what we stop doing.

The Museum of Australian Democracy is a beloved tourist site for school children around Australia wanting to learn about the history of Australian democracy. Its kids space is fantastic, and the ability to stroll through King's Hall and into the House and the Senate in Old Parliament House is an exceptional opportunity for Australian students. But the cuts that have been inflicted by this government will make it more difficult for those institutions to do their jobs.

Then we have the cuts to the Taxation Office. My colleague Senator Deborah O'Neill has described the movement to Gosford of tax staff as 'a dirty deal done in the dark'. This fit-out is costing $20 million, and it is being queried by residents of the Central Coast. The land on which the tax office building will be located had been earmarked for a performing arts school. Instead the government has decided that it will pork-barrel with Public Service jobs, despite the fact that the tax office has 6,200 desks sitting empty in its buildings around Australia and despite the fact that it is trying to get out of leases on office space equivalent to 2½ times the size of the Melbourne Cricket Ground's playing surface. Nonetheless, this government has decided to pork-barrel with public servant jobs, moving staff to the ATO and opening an office which Central Coast residents are concerned about and which the ATO still cannot tell taxpayers what it will be used for.

It takes a special talent to annoy both Canberra voters and Central Coast voters with your attempts to pork-barrel Public Service jobs. I say to this government: stop with the pork-barrelling. Just get on with good public administration. Recognise the value of a healthy Public Service and stick to your promise before the election not to cut more than 12,000 Public Service jobs. Instead, we have seen many more Public Service jobs go—another broken promise from this government.

The savage cuts to the Public Service of course inflict harm on the great city of Canberra—the OECD's most livable region—but they also do damage to our long-term capacity. As Laura Tingle's Quarterly Essay recently noted, the cuts to the institutional memory of the Public Service will harm the ability of public servants to make long-term decisions. That institutional knowledge is important in the area of economic policymaking, where there are now precious few public servants in place who recall the last Australian recession, but it is important in other areas too: that we have a Public Service that is able to give frank and fearless advice informed by what has worked in the past and what has not worked in the past.

What this government does not seem to realise is that the Public Service in Australia is relatively lean. When we look at the share of Australians employed in the public sector, it is lower than the OECD average. Australia's Public Service is not bloated. It does not need to be taken to with a meataxe. It does not need to be disrespected by ministers. We need a government which can respect the Public Service and which can offer them pay rises, at the very least, in line with inflation rather than inflicting real pay cuts at the same time as excessive job cuts. It seems that the only people that the government is willing to look after are those at the very top of the Public Service. I do not begrudge those at the top their pay packets, but it would be good if we had a government also willing to offer fair pay bargaining, as the Community and Public Sector Union has called for. The CPSU's claims are not excessive, and its desire to have good wage deals across departments reflects a recognition that well-paid public servants and a Public Service that has an appropriate number of jobs will deliver the programs for the government of the day. Those of my constituents who work in the federal Public Service are willing to work for either side of politics; they just ask that their work be properly respected.

There are significant economic challenges facing Australia, and we lack the economic leadership that the Prime Minister promised before coming to office. The tax debate is at sixes and sevens. The Prime Minister, who thought that he was going to have tax ideas, seems to have advanced no further than the 281 different proposals that he put on the table back in 2005. The share market is nearly back to where it was in 2005, and, frankly, Malcolm Turnbull's ideas on tax reform do not seem to have advanced very much further.

Nola Marino (Forrest, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The south-west of Western Australia is the jewel in the crown of the state's economic and cultural development, and the electorate of Forrest sits at the heart of the south-west. It is also an environmental icon, being listed as one of the world's international biodiversity hotspots.

Our major industries include: agriculture, beef and dairy cattle, sheep, fruit and vegetables, wine, and flowers; forestry, with both hard and softwoods; mining, with alumina, coal, mineral sands, tin and tantalite; fisheries; manufacturing; commerce; and tourism. The region is a tourism and holiday destination of choice for the majority of people from the Perth metropolitan area. This wide range of activity, coupled with the significant population growth of the region that exceeds both Western Australian state and national growth, has put significant pressure on the transport infrastructure of the region. Planning for, and investment in, road infrastructure has not been able to kept pace with the growth or demand in the South West, and this has been a long term trend.

There has been considerable investment in roads leading to the South West, as evidenced by the opening of the Perth to Bunbury Highway in 2009 and the extension of dual lanes on the Old Coast Road by the Court government in the nineties. It must be noted that, while these important assets have improved travel between the South West and Perth, the outcome is that even more traffic is entering and will continue to enter the South West, putting even more pressure on local roads. The completion of the Perth to Bunbury Highway was the first step in meeting the road needs of the area. There is now dual lane access from Bunbury north to Perth and beyond. This has moved the traffic bottleneck on this service corridor from Mandurah through to the south of Bunbury and has highlighted the inadequate arterial roads that radiate traffic out from Bunbury. The Bunbury Outer Ring Road and the Port Access Road are being delivered. I attended the opening of stage 1 in 2010. Stage 2 was completed by 2013. However, funding has not yet been committed for the completion of this project, and it must be prioritised.

The Bussell Highway is the coastal route that runs from Bunbury to Augusta, servicing the major population centres of Capel, Busselton and Margaret River. It links these iconic tourist destinations to the world and is the freight corridor for wine, agriculture, forestry and manufacturing industries. It contains sections of single-lane and dual-lane road. The section from Busselton to Margaret River can now be identified as containing the most inadequate and, indeed, dangerous single-lane section, with high traffic loads and poor overtaking capacity. My vision for transport in the long term includes dual lanes on this road, all the way from Bunbury to Margaret River. I recognise that this represents significant additional investment in the region, but the time to start planning is now. I want to see both of these projects on the state and Commonwealth government's plan for development in the near future.

The government has, of course, been investing in the South West, and I would like to mention some of that investment now. The Shire of Donnybrook-Balingup has received funding under round 2 of the Australian government's Bridges Renewal Programme to support vital upgrades of local bridge infrastructure. The Bridges Renewal Program underpins the government's support for local bridges, which are, particularly in rural and regional areas, vital in ensuring communities and local businesses have easy access to essential services, traffic movement and the efficient transportation of road freight. The project will be managed by the shire and involves replacing a one-lane timber bridge with a two-lane concrete bridge over the Preston River on Trevena Road. The government's Bridges Renewal Program will contribute $750,000 to the project, which is expected to cost a total of $1.5 million.

This project complements another excellent investment by this government under round 1 of the program, as construction is well underway on a new $16.54 million bridge over the Collie River between Burekup and Roelands. The Australian government is providing $8.27 million to the project. The timber Collie River bridge is 86 years old and nearing the end of its life, so this new concrete structure will help improve safety for all road users. An average of 6,000 vehicles use the Burekup bridge each day, of which around 18 per cent are heavy vehicles. These works include a new culvert across the Collie River floodway, realignment of around 1.7 kilometres of the South Western Highway between Russell Road and Raymond Road and modifications to existing intersections, including Raymond Road, Russell Road and Orchard Drive.

In the tourist area, Forrest has received a boost with the announcement of $400,000 for local projects under the federal government's Tourism Demand Driver Infrastructure Program. This investment in tourism infrastructure will help attract more visitors to Forrest and provide an even better traveller experience. It will also encourage them to stay much longer in what is the Margaret River region. The government contributed $200,000 to the Margaret River Busselton Tourism Association for their Lighthouses Project, which will see the restoration and redevelopment of eight buildings at the Cape Leeuwin and Naturaliste Lighthouse precincts. Another $200,000 went to the Busselton Jetty Environment and Conservation Association for a project aimed at attracting international tourists to the region by updating the offerings of new, high quality marine experiences. There are a lot of those in this area. Of course, direct access to the tourism market via an expanded Busselton airport is still a critical investment requirement.

The South West has also been a major beneficiary of investment in communications, and I personally want to thank the Prime Minister for his support as the previous communications minister in getting 'better broadband sooner' to the South West. Unlike the Labor debacle, when we were looking at action at least a decade away, my region is today seeing towers going up and boxes being built on street corners. Around 7,300 premises in Greater Bunbury are a step closer to getting access to the National Broadband Network, with construction on the fibre-to-the-node network now underway. It is an important milestone, with greater certainty for homes and businesses as they prepare for fast broadband in the suburbs of Usher, Withers, South Bunbury, College Grove, Dalyellup, Gelorup, South Bunbury, and Carey Park. Final network designs are now complete, and we have already seen nbn co subcontractors in the streets of South Bunbury, laying out fibre and building cabinets to house the electronics needed to supply superfast broadband. Around 376 premises in South Dunsborough are also a step closer to getting access to the NBN, with construction on the fixed-wireless network now underway. The NBN national rollout plan to September 2016 identifies approximately 55,000 premises that will be able to connect to the NBN by means of fixed-line technology and an additional 3,320 premises getting access via wireless technology throughout the South West. This was an underserviced area and now it is being prioritised, like many other underserviced areas around Australia.

The Greater Bunbury region will now see a total of 32,300 premises accessing the NBN via fixed-line technology much sooner than previously thought. The Busselton region will also see a lot more people accessing the NBN, much faster than previously thought, with a total of 16,600 premises that will now receive fixed-line access to the NBN and another 2,500 to receive wireless access. In addition it was fantastic to see the interim satellite launched, the first of NBN's two world-class communication satellites. The launch of the Sky Muster satellite from South America means the wait for access to the National Broadband Network is almost over for many of the more remote homes and businesses in my electorate of Forrest.

The South West has also been a major beneficiary of the federal government's Mobile Black Spot Program. The Commonwealth has committed $3 million towards 14 new or upgraded mobile phone towers in the Forrest electorate to provide mobile services in a number of, again, underserviced areas in the South West, especially in more regional and remote parts. The program will see mobile phone towers constructed or upgraded in: Cundinup, Darradup, East Barrabup, Jalbarragup, and Nannup East in the Shire of Nannup; Baudin, Hamelin Bay, Leeuwin, Rosa Brook and Rosa Glen in the Shire of Augusta-Margaret River; Ferguson Valley and the Wellington Mill in the Shire of Dardanup; Lowden in the Shire of Donnybrook-Balingup; and Yallingup East in the City of Busselton. In total, 75 of the 106 identified mobile black spots in the Forrest electorate will receive coverage under the program. The program includes funding from the Commonwealth, the state of Western Australia and service providers, and will see a total spend of $15.52 million across the Forrest electorate. It is urgent that the WA state government signs up to this funding program as soon as possible.

The South West has seen additional funding granted to local governments throughout the South West as part of the federal government's Financial Assistance Grant program. Councils in the electorate of Forrest have, this week, received an additional $2.2 million as the first quarterly payment for the 2015-16 financial year. This brings the total of the Financial Assistance Grant to the Forrest electorate to $7.9 million for this financial year. This is in addition to the government's $3.2 billion Roads to Recovery Program under which councils in Forrest received nearly $1.5 million in March last year to spend on locally identified road projects—locally identified, which is really important—with a top-up of $212,852 in May 2015.

The government has also committed a further $200 million under the Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program, providing councils with funding for important local infrastructure over five years from 2014-15. To further reduce crashes on Australian roads, an additional $200 million had been committed by the government over the next two years under the $500 million Black Spot Program, of which $2.3 million was announced last year to fix seven dangerous black spots on South West roads. The approved projects are: a new shared pedestrian path on the Busselton Bypass in West Busselton; the installation of street lighting at the Forrest Highway-Hynes Road intersection in the Shire of Dardanup; the clearing of roadside hazards and upgrading road shoulders and signage on the Balingup-Nannup Road and Charley Creek Road in the Shire of Donnybrook; the installation of street lighting at the corner of Bussell Highway and Spurr Street in Capel; and improving the delineation through the roundabout at the intersection of Blair Street and Clarke Street in South Bunbury.

The coalition government has also funded support work to revive and maintain Indigenous languages in the South West. There was $250,000 provided to the Noongar Language Centre to support the administration of an Indigenous language centre in Bunbury, and to undertake language revival activities on the Noongar language across the South West of Western Australia. This funding will support community-driven activities designed to address the erosion and loss of Indigenous languages across Australia. I went to the announcement and launch of this project recently in Bunbury and there was a great deal of excitement. I know that all of those involved in this project are going to work particularly hard to make sure that the Noongar language is not just recorded but also spoken and passed on to subsequent generations. It is something that the local community is particularly passionate about.

Kelvin Thomson (Wills, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very aware of the potential power of symbolic acts. One of my proudest days in this parliament was the day, in 2008, when the parliament delivered a national apology to the stolen generations. I have supported the RECOGNISE campaign to include recognition of Indigenous Australians as the First Australians in the Constitution. But at the end of the day symbolism can only take you so far. It is practical action which makes the difference.

It was distressing to hear, once again, in yesterday's Closing the Gap report just how little progress has been made in accomplishing employment outcomes for Indigenous Australians. We all know about the dignity of work and how there is nothing like it for building self-respect. But the goal of halving the employment gap by 2018 is not on track. Indeed, the Indigenous employment rate fell from 53.8 per cent in 2008 to 47.5 per cent in 2012-13. I believe it is a national disgrace that we have not done more to ensure Indigenous Australians have job opportunities.

In order to do better, we should look closely at what is going on in rural and regional Australia. When we do this we find that employers choose to bring in, and are allowed or even encouraged to bring in, temporary migrant workers. Let me give a classic example. In August 2009, Boys from the Bush Projects, an organisation working with remote Indigenous young people, said the following:

The employment of choice for many young Indigenous people living in remote communities is working in a meat processing plant, and they have proven to very good workers. The Remote Area Work Scheme was developed specifically to help disadvantaged Indigenous youth living in remote communities, to gain employment in the meat processing industry.

However, the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations favours the importation of foreign workers for these positions instead of young Aboriginal workers. This outcome is achieved by fast tracking the application of foreign workers.

The unnecessary protracted delay by the Department to provide modest funding for the Remote Area Work Scheme to recruit and support young Indigenous people into immediate employment in the meat industry ... makes mockery of the Australian Government's clearly defined stance on closing the unemployment gap for Aboriginal people.

In addition to the fast tracking of foreign worker applications, one of the approval requirements for a foreign worker, is that the applicant employer must have exhausted all efforts to employ available Indigenous people. Yet the department makes no check on whether or not the applicants have rejected an offer by the Remote Area Work Scheme to provide young Indigenous workers.

New regulations now see boners and slicers identified as skilled workers under the 457 visa process. Nearly all the young people placed into abattoirs by Remote Area Work Scheme were given the job of boning and slicing. These are tasks that can be mastered by these young people within a few weeks. This is exactly what some meat processors and overseas recruitment companies are doing. They are going to places like China and South Korea to run short training courses and then bringing these people into Australia as skilled and unskilled labourers.

The most glaring examples of how temporary work visa programs disadvantage Indigenous Australians in regional areas are the 457 visa program, especially the so-called 457 labour agreements, and the working holiday visa program, the 417 and 462 visas. The 457 labour agreements involve, in theory at least, some effort to establish that Australian workers are not available to do the work, though the systems are opaque and can be rorted.

The working holiday visa program does not even pretend to do that. In 2015 the World Bank did a study which concluded that employers' ready access to working holiday visa holders, backpackers and illegal foreign workers was 'undermining' demand for Pacific islanders under the seasonal worker pilot program. The World Bank report recommended that the government scrap or scale back visa extensions for backpackers who work on farms, and spend more money monitoring compliance with the rules.

This government needs to put the same effort into researching the adverse effects of all these visa programs on demand for Indigenous Australians and then remedying them. The findings will be the same. Labour agreements allow employers to access 457 visas for lower skilled foreign workers not eligible for the standard, or 'non-concessional', 457 visa program. These 'concessional' foreign workers are in semiskilled occupations or, where they are in skilled occupations, they have substandard English language skills or qualifications, or wages below the standard 457 minimum.

According to the latest Department of Immigration and Border Protection annual report, at 30 June 2015 there were 213 labour agreements in place and a further 29 agreements still to be finalised. Around 3,000 concessional 457 visa workers would have been working in Australia in mid-2015 under labour agreements—assuming they represent 2.9 per cent of all 457 visa holders, their share of total 457 visa grants. Many of these concessional 457 visa workers are doing jobs located outside the major capital cities, mainly in Queensland, New South Wales and South Australia. The vast majority are probably in regional or rural areas. Labour agreements operate in many sectors of Australian primary industry, including the meat, pork and fishing industries.

The meat industry is the most important for 457 labour agreements. For the past five years, around 1,000 so-called skilled meat workers have been employed at any one time on concessional 457s in Australia. At the end of March 2015, the figure was 900. Nearly all are from countries where English is not the first language. Around 85 per cent are from the Philippines or Brazil, with the rest mainly Vietnamese or Chinese. The partners of these 457 meat workers often also work for the same meat industry employer, so the real size of the 457 workforce in this sector is larger than the official figures suggest.

The Senate inquiry into temporary work visas has heard evidence that 457 meat worker numbers are declining because employers have found an even cheaper temporary foreign labour supply—417 visa holders from Korea and elsewhere are said to be replacing 457 meat workers because the 417s can be engaged as 'contractors' or ABN workers and paid below-award wages, often through labour hire companies. The 2015 joint investigation by the ABC's Four Cornersprogram and Fairfax exposed some shocking examples of this practice.

In the first six months of 2015-16, 'skilled meat worker' is still one of the top 15 occupations for 457 visa grants in two Australian states—Queensland and South Australia. In South Australia, there were actually more 457 visa grants for 'skilled meat workers' than any other occupation. In Queensland, 'skilled meat workers' are ranked sixth by number of 457 visa grants.

According to the immigration department's guidelines on meat industry labour agreements, employers granted access to concessional 457 visas are meant to 'maintain a good record of training Australians through the provision of employment, training and career progression' during the three-year term of the agreement. The departmental guidelines do not even mention training or employing Indigenous Australians. I have not seen any published information from the department on what, if anything, has been achieved, or even tried, in terms of providing a foothold into stable employment for the first Australians, by employers of the 1,000 or so 457 meat workers over the last five years.

For all Australians, but especially for Indigenous Australians, the worst features of the working holiday visa program are probably the so-called second year working holiday visa and the coalition government's recent extension of work rights for working holiday visa holders in northern Australia. The second year working holiday visa is available to all 417 visa holders who do three months work in regional Australia in the agriculture, construction or mining industries. There has been huge growth in the number of 417 visa holders taking up the second year visa, especially in horticulture and other sectors of agriculture. Between 2005-06 and 2013-14, the number of second year 417 visas granted grew from just 2,700 to over 45,000. In 2014-15, visa grants fell to 41,000 but will rise again under this government's visa deregulation agenda. Over 90 per cent of these young foreign nationals do their work in the agricultural sector.

I endorse the CFMEU submission to the Senate inquiry into temporary work visas, which said:

… employers seeking access to WHM—

working holiday maker—

labour should not have the benefit of the state providing them with a form of 'forced labour' of temporary visa holders. That is what parts of Australian primary industry now have, with a captive workforce of 41,300 WHMs doing 88 days work in agriculture to gain their second 417 visa in 2013-14. That is equal to 13% of average total employment in Agriculture, forestry and fishing in that year of 310,000, as measured by the ABS. The percentage is even more significant, if considering only horticulture where most WHMs do their '88 days'.

What chance have Indigenous Australians got of finding regular seasonal work in agriculture when the Australian government is funnelling thousands of often desperate young foreign workers into the sector, with the incentive of getting a visa allowing another year's stay and work in Australia? There is no legal obligation on employers to even look for Australian workers before hiring foreign nationals on working holiday visas, and some subclass 417 visa holders will work for nothing just to get a visa for the second year.

The coalition government has two initiatives to extend work rights for working holiday visa holders in northern Australia. This area includes all of the Northern Territory and those areas of Western Australia and Queensland above the Tropic of Capricorn. The first has already been implemented and gives subclass 417 and 462 visa holders the right to work for 12 months with the same employer in five designated industries: agriculture, forestry and fishing; construction; mining; aged and disability care; and tourism and hospitality. The standard 417 or 462 visa limitation is six months with the same employer. The second initiative will enable subclass 462 visa holders to obtain a second year visa for the first time, by doing three months work in Northern Australia in the agriculture, tourism and hospitality industries.

I would like to hear from the government how these working holiday visa initiatives will help the employment prospects of Indigenous Australians in northern Australia. How does the government think that employers will respond to an increased labour supply of young foreign nationals, many desperate for work to stay in Australia? Does the government seriously believe that injecting this increased supply of temporary foreign labour into northern Australia will increase incentives for employers to hire and train Indigenous Australians? The government should table the independent assessment of the impact of these working holiday visa initiatives on the labour market opportunities for Indigenous Australians in northern Australia, which it should have commissioned. If it does not have one, it must explain why.

Instead of hand wringing about our failure to close the gap, the government needs to take practical steps on its temporary visa programs. On 457 labour agreements: especially in the meat industry there must be stronger measures and legal obligations to ensure that employers engage, train and retain progressively more Indigenous Australians over the life of these agreements and that, where there are problems, measures are instituted to address these, with government financial support.

On the 417 and 462 second year working holiday visa: the government should heed the recommendation of the World Bank report and scrap or scale back access to this visa, instead of expanding access, as it is recklessly doing. If the government were serious about improving the employment outcomes for Indigenous Australians, it would commission serious research to identify the full impact of its working holiday visa initiatives on the First Australians and act on the findings.

On the problem of foreign workers working in agriculture either with no valid visa or in breach of the visa conditions identified by the World Bank: the government must get serious about enforcing the employer sanctions provisions put into the Migration Act by the former Labor government. Only serious enforcement action and substantial financial penalties under the no-fault civil penalty provisions will effectively deter employers of illegal workers. At 30 June 2015 there had been no prosecution at all of any employer for the civil or criminal offences of the employer sanction provisions.

Finally, employers should make an annual contribution to a training fund for each 457 visa holder they sponsor. The money in this fund should go towards the training and employment of Indigenous Australians. I think Indigenous Australians are entitled to better than they have been receiving. The closing the gap report makes it clear that we are not making progress in relation to Indigenous employment. The steps I have outlined would enable us to make greater progress in relation to Indigenous employment.

Andrew Nikolic (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I appreciate this opportunity to reflect on the progress that we have made in my home state of Tasmania since the September 2013 election. We took a plan to the last election to support Tasmania's economic recovery after 16 years of Labor and Labor-Green government in Hobart and six years of Labor and Labor-Green government in Canberra, which regrettably had left my home state of Tasmania at the very bottom of national benchmarks when it came to things like employment. I am pleased to say that, whilst there is still a lot of work to do, the trends are indeed most encouraging.

Our plan is working, as evidenced by the national figures, and our job achievements in Tasmania testify to that. In December 2015 employment data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics showed that 427,200 jobs had been created in Australia since we came to office. That is 427,200 more Australians who are earning a living, buying from local suppliers, paying taxes and generating the revenue that government needs for public policy priorities. That is 427,200 more families that are better off today than they were at the 2013 election. I am pleased to say that in 2015 national jobs growth was 10 times what it was under Labor during their last year in office. In fact, jobs growth in 2015 was the strongest calendar year growth for a decade.

In Tasmania the jobless statistics have improved even more dramatically since the 2013 election. When I went to the 2013 election the jobless rate in Tasmania was 8.6 per cent. I am pleased to say that 2½ years later, as a result of the policies of this government, it is now 6.6 per cent and we are no longer on the bottom of the national job statistics. Ten thousand full- and part-jobs have been created. I get a sense in my community that there is purpose and optimism everywhere that I go.

A good example of that is the Sensis Business Index, which last month confirmed that business confidence in Tasmania is the highest in the nation, with confidence among small and medium businesses having more than tripled. That is why we are investing so heavily in jobs and infrastructure packages that are aimed at generating even higher confidence, growth and investment. No-one can deny that we have led a significant turnaround in Tasmania's unemployment rate. No-one can deny that the strategic investments we have made in Tasmania will enable us in the longer term to benefit from the four bilateral and multilateral trade deals negotiated by our outstanding Minister for Trade and Investment, Andrew Robb. I take this opportunity, in the aftermath of Minister Robb's recent announcement about his future, to congratulate him and to thank him for his great service to our nation.

When I talk about big investments in Tasmania, there are three things that I will mention—although there are more. There is a billion dollars for Tasmanian infrastructure. A large chunk of that, some $400 million, will be for the Midland Highway, to make sure that that is a much better highway into the future. That translates into many hundreds of small projects, including, for example, the Kings Meadows Connector in my electorate of Bass, which was completed last year and now ensures that, during busy periods of morning traffic, cars are not backed up onto the Midland Highway. It has certainly made the Kings Meadows Connector a much safer part of the road system in my electorate. A billion dollars in infrastructure is certainly a long-term strategic enabler of Tasmania's future prosperity.

There is, of course, the $203 million commitment that was made to enhance the Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme and $60 million in federal funding for tranche 2 irrigation schemes. When we add a $30 million contribution from the Tasmanian state government and $30 million from the private sector—people who are buying into these irrigation schemes—what you are going to see in the areas of these schemes, including one at Scottsdale in my electorate of Bass, is 95 per cent water certainty. Tagged onto that, we have done a phase 3 power study, because, when you are talking about converting marginal farmland and marginal agricultural land to something more productive, the two key things that you need are reliable water and reliable phase 3 power. My hope is that when this tranche 2 irrigation scheme is completed at Scottsdale and the other four areas across the rest of Tasmania, we will indeed see significant growth in the productive capacity of our farms in Tasmania.

These investments that I have just mentioned are important because many of them will be located predominantly in Northern Tasmania, where we have competitive advantages like advanced manufacturing, forestry, agriculture and tourism. Tourism has been particular strong in the last couple of years. Later in my speech, I will mention some of the ways that we are trying to make northern Tasmania more of an entry point for our state. I am also actively supporting our major industries, like Bell Bay Aluminium, through reforms to the renewable energy target and repealing the damaging coastal shipping laws introduced under Labor and the Greens. That is because fixing Australia's coastal shipping collapse is becoming more and more critical each day, with two more operators recently withdrawing their Australian crewed vessels from domestic waters.

In the aftermath of Labor's disastrous 2012 coastal shipping laws, the coastal shipping fleet halved, with huge losses in the industry. The Productivity Commission received evidence from Bell Bay Aluminium, in my electorate of Bass, that their freight costs increased by 63 per cent in the aftermath of Labor's ill-considered coastal shipping laws, which—let's face it—were a gift to the MUA. The MUA said, 'Jump,' and those members opposite involved with the MUA said, 'How high?' Demurrage rates tripled. In fact, there has been a two-thirds decline in the carrying capacity of the major Australian coastal trading fleet. When the coalition left office in 2007, there were 30 major Australian trading vessels with a general licence. By 2014 the fleet had halved, to just 15 vessels. In addition, the number of vessels with a transitional general licence has dropped by more than half—from 16 to seven vessels—and, with the most recent decision by CSL, this has dropped further to six.

Put simply, the system that Bill Shorten brought in at the behest of his MUA masters is a disastrous failure that is hurting my home state of Tasmania. It is a disgrace that the coalition's coastal shipping reforms are being blocked in the Senate. Cargo is stuck on wharves, threatening Australian jobs in sectors that use shipping and disrupting entire communities. The Australian shipping industry is simply not competitive, and it is costing Australian jobs. That is why we will be bringing the coastal shipping legislation back into the parliament this year, and crossbench senators need to consider why they should continue to back a system which has seen such a marked decline in Australia's coastal shipping.

The coalition not only has articulated a vision about more local jobs and strategic investment for our future but also has good results to show from it. I am pleased to inform the House that much-needed resources have been won for my electorate of Bass so far. There is $34 million for north-east freight routes, including the widening of Bridport Main Road from Dalrymple Road to the East Tamar Highway. Works will be undertaken on Emily Street, Edward Street and Waterhouse Road to facilitate the increasing number of heavy vehicles which will be accessing Bridport Main Road in this area. This region caters for substantial agricultural traffic, so these works are vital to improving the safety and productivity performance of the road network. Improving freight outcomes is important for existing Tasmanian businesses to remain competitive and to attract new business investments to our state.

There is so much other good news to highlight for my community. There is $19 million in grants to the Launceston campus of the University of Tasmania. It is worth noting in particular a strengthening partnership between the university, the DSTO facility at Scottsdale and the Centre for Food Innovation, in particular in securing a microwave assisted thermal sterilisation machine for Scottsdale. That is something that I am advocating for very strongly.

There has been $17 million in financial assistance grants provided to councils in my electorate. There has been a $23 million funding injection for elective surgery, improving access to elective surgery in my electorate of Bass. There has been $10 million to save the John L Grove rehabilitation centre. This cleaned up a Labor mess, because this centre was opened with much fanfare in August 2013 just before the 2013 election but no provision was made in the Tasmanian state budget by the Giddings government for the ongoing operation of this centre. I was very pleased in May last year to announce that we had secured $10 million to stop the John L Grove centre from closing and give the Tasmanian government time to make sure they could integrate the centre's operation into the broader Tasmanian health system.

There has been $9 million in Bass from the Tasmanian Jobs and Growth Package; $6 million for North Bank redevelopment, turning an unattractive industrial site into something that is much more family friendly; $5.7 million provided for Roads to Recovery funding; $3 million in innovation and investment grants to local business to expand their productive capacity and create more local jobs; $3 million for Dorset Renewable Industries to establish an integrated timber-processing facility at the Ling Siding site at Scottsdale; and $2.7 million to establish the Major Projects Approval Agency, which will be focused on enabling investment. I understand that the agency is talking to proponents with hundreds of millions of dollars of investment in mind for my home state of Tasmania. There has been $2½ million for Tamar River silt removal; $2.45 million to establish the Blue Derby mountain bike trails, where two Australian championships will be held and new businesses are opening, which is great for Derby and the north-east; an estimated $2 million for Green Army projects, which focuses our environmental improvement strategies on the projects that are most important to local communities and local people; and $1.47 million for the North East Rail Trail project, building infrastructure that enables other investment and, as I said, helps make northern Tasmania more of an entry point for our state.

I am the patron of cycling in Tasmania. When you think about the infrastructure that is being established—the Hollybank mountain bike trails in my electorate, the Trevallyn mountain bike trails, the Blue Derby mountain bike trails and, in the last budget, the funding we secured to build a rail trail between Launceston and Scottsdale—we are establishing backbone infrastructure for cycling tourism which will be beneficial for so many other businesses establishing themselves within my electorate.

I had great pride in opening the $1.25 million Invermay Park redevelopment, rejuvenating the home of the Mowbray Cricket Club, where champion cricketer Ricky Ponting first made his mark. There was $1.15 million for the Flinders Island airport upgrade, to deal with long-overdue maintenance issues, and I am working with the council to make sure that we address the longer term needs of Flinders Island airfield. There was $850,000 in capital grants for non-government schools; $790,000 to save St Giles speech pathology services; $500,000 to fix a traffic black spot outside the Prospect Vale Marketplace on Westbury Road; $500,000 to look into Launceston's sewerage and stormwater problem and find out how we can turn the seven archaic, inefficient sewage treatment plants into something that is more First World; $134,000 in Anzac Centenary grants; $71,500 to support the Ravenswood Neighbourhood House and the outstanding work the centre does; $70,000 to upgrade the Launceston Police and Citizens Youth Clubs; $66,000 in grants to local sporting champions; and $21,000 for Men's Sheds in Riverside, Norwood, Rocherlea and Flinders Island. There is the Tamar River Recovery Plan, which is making a real difference to the health of our river and will do so into the future. There is a lot more that I could say.

It is an honour to represent the people of Bass in the federal parliament, and I want to continue building on the momentum achieved to date so northern Tasmanians can look to the future with even greater confidence. We have made some great progress, but there is more to do. Growth is up, jobs are up, and I am working with my state colleagues to make sure that our policy is joined up and coherent. In this election year, I will be asking the people of northern Tasmania for their continuing support. I thank the House.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Let me take you back a bit more than two years, to the 2013 election campaign. This government, we were told, would be the infrastructure government. There would be cranes in the sky and bulldozers working on major projects within a year of the election. Two years later, the only thing we have seen in the sky from this government is the helicopter of the former Speaker Bronwyn Bishop.

Josh Frydenberg (Kooyong, Liberal Party, Minister for Resources, Energy and Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You never saw that. You only saw a photo of her landing.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

And the only bulldozer we have seen, in terms of holes being dug, is the one they used to bury Tony Abbott's prime ministership. We have seen no projects built under this government.

Andrew Nikolic (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What about the Midland Highway in Tasmania?

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What we have seen is a magical infrastructure re-announcement tour where the government has gone around the country promoting—

Andrew Nikolic (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What about the Blue Derby mountain bike trails?

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Are you going to hold these clowns to order, Mr Deputy Speaker?

Russell Broadbent (McMillan, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think you can look after yourself.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I can indeed, and I note that it is fair game in this chamber from this point on. The fact is that the Australian Bureau of Statistics shows that public investment in infrastructure is down by 20 per cent when you compare the September 2015 quarter with the September 2013 quarter.

Of the government's three big-ticket items when it comes to roads, the East West Link, as we know from the audits that have taken place and from the business case that was prepared for that project, would have produced 45c of benefit for every dollar of taxpayers' money. It is like the government going to an individual taxpayer and saying, 'You give me $100 and I'll give you $45 back next time I see you'—an extraordinary proposition. Of course, we know that $1½ billion was pre-paid in order to prop up the Victorian state government budget but with a consequential negative impact on the Commonwealth budget—an extraordinary proposition. The Perth Freight Link has been knocked over in the courts because it was a project that was done on the run, where the WA minister responsible indicated that there was no business case and no planning had been done that was worthy of any public scrutiny, and where the courts have determined that the approvals were made incorrectly because the route goes through a wetland in Perth and simply is not ready to be approved in an appropriate way. WestConnex, in Sydney, is a project that began with a $10 billion price tag and is now priced at $16.8 billion. Again, advance payments have been made with respect to that project. Some $2.75 billion has been forwarded to New South Wales. It is quite an extraordinary proposition.

We have had a range of ministers responsible whom I have seen off as the shadow minister. One of the new ministers has been given the title of minister for major projects. He should be called the minister for Labor projects because NorthConnex, the Pacific Highway, the Bruce Highway, the Gateway Upgrade North, NorthLink WA, the Perth Airport gateway, the North-South Road Corridor, the Midland Highway in Tasmania and the Inland Rail project are all projects that were funded and begun under the former Labor government.

What we have seen from the government from time to time is that, extraordinarily, it has given projects new names. The Swan Valley Bypass, for example, has become NorthLink WA. The F3 to M2 project in New South Wales has become NorthConnex. They are the same projects. Giving them a new name does not make them new projects, but the government has pretended that they are. Among the projects, just in New South Wales, that have been re-announced by the government as part of its magical infrastructure re-announcement tour, Pacific Highway projects were re-announced on 8 January, 21 March, 17 September and 22 December 2014, and 26 March, 1 April and 28 April 2015. The F3 to M2 was re-announced as NorthConnex on 15 March 2014. The Hunter Expressway was re-announced at its opening—the government pretending that it had anything to do with it at all—on 21 March 2014. The Great Western Highway was re-announced on 10 July 2014. The northern Sydney freight upgrade was re-announced on 28 November 2013. The Moorebank Intermodal was re-announced on 13 December 2013. The Port Botany upgrade program was re-announced on 13 May 2014. The Port Botany rail line was re-announced on 7 March 2014. These projects were commenced and under construction. Indeed, in the minister's state of Victoria, the Regional Rail Link was actually opposed as part of the economic stimulus plan by those opposite, and yet the government has pretended that it was somehow responsible.

We know that what occurred when the government came to office was that Tony Abbott, the former Prime Minister, and the government cancelled funding for every single public transport project that was not already under construction, including the Melbourne Metro, Brisbane's Cross River Rail line and the Tonsley Park upgrade in South Australia. The Gawler line electrification was stopped halfway through. These are all cuts that were made. Cuts were also made, of course, to road projects—projects like the M80 in Victoria and the Midland Highway in Tasmania, which was cut by $100 million.

Josh Frydenberg (Kooyong, Liberal Party, Minister for Resources, Energy and Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What about the East West Link?

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister opposite appears to be not embarrassed, as he should be, by the performance on the East West Link, but he raises it. He should look at the Auditor-General's assessment of that project or look at the cost-benefit analysis, because the government did provide that $1½ billion advance payment as part of $3 billion that they committed to a project that would return 45c for every dollar invested—but that, of course, was not new money. That was money that was cut from the Melbourne Metro, some $3 billion; from the M80, $500 million; and from the Managed Motorways Program. More than $70 million was cut from that program. That is a great example of what the government have done on infrastructure, because they cut the program and then went back and announced the Monash Freeway managed motorways project in a splash, as if it were new, a year and a half after they cut it in their 2014 budget.

What those projects had in common was that they had all been approved by Infrastructure Australia. This government has funded projects that were promised during the election campaign but cut projects that would actually produce productivity benefits in order to do so. As a result, because they have not proceeded—projects like Perth Freight Link and other projects that they talked up—you have seen that 20 per cent decline in infrastructure investment.

It is extraordinary that the new Minister for Territories, Local Government and Major Projects told the Australian Institute of Landscape Architects yesterday:

If our cities are pretty good by world standards, then, why is there a need for federal government involvement in cities policy? After all, previous attempts at such involvement–the grand schemes of the Whitlam years, for example, or the ‘cities unit’ Anthony Albanese created as Minister for Infrastructure–have not made much difference.

The fact is that federal involvement in our cities does make a difference. I thought that when the Turnbull coup against Tony Abbott occurred last year—against the elected Prime Minister—and a minister for cities was appointed, in Jamie Briggs, it was a good signal and I welcomed it. Unfortunately, Jamie Briggs was given no department, no major cities unit and no real job to do, just a title. They have not even bothered to replace him in the two months since he has gone, and it would appear that there is no real difference when it comes to their policies.

It is extraordinary that rather than building new infrastructure and having a program of their own to go out there and promote in this election campaign, they have actually cut the infrastructure budget by $18 million and reallocated that money to an advertising campaign. It is breathtaking in its boldness. They have said in Senate estimates that it will include newspapers and TV with state and even regionally based television ads. It will cover 88 projects, most of which will be projects that were funded and which began under the former Labor government. Having presided over a 20 per cent decline in infrastructure investment, the government will now cut funding even further to fund spin. If you cannot deliver actual infrastructure projects, deliver propaganda. That is the policy of this government. It takes a special kind of arrogance to cut investment to the bone and then cut it even further so that you can pretend that you have made no cuts. No doubt in the member for Petrie's electorate they will pretend that they had anything to do with the Moreton Bay regional rail line that was, of course, funded by the former government. It was promised in 2010. The funding clicked in and construction began in 2012. The government have, to their credit, supported Badgerys Creek as Sydney's second airport. That is an important project that will create jobs for Western Sydney. They need to make sure that they get it right. This is an opportunity to have world's best practice in terms of the environment, the amenity and the boost that it will provide for employment in Western Sydney. It can be done in a way that is sensitive to environmental concerns and minimises the impact on the local community, and they need to make sure that they do that.

The truth is that you cannot have an airport on day one without also having a rail line on day one. The government should be funding that rail line, not just roads. But when it comes to rail, this is a Prime Minister who wants to ride on trams and trains—and take selfies on trams and trains—but not fund trains, buses and trams. This is government by selfie. The fact is that the government has to fund public transport, it has to get serious about urban policy and cities policy and it has to restore Infrastructure Australia's independence. There is an opportunity with the reshuffle to do just that, but this government is so internally chaotic that it seems incapable of doing so.

Luke Howarth (Petrie, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on Appropriation Bill (No. 3) 2015-2016 and Appropriation Bill (No. 4) 2015-2016. I would like to start by thanking the people of Petrie for showing confidence in me in the September 2013 election when I was elected as the member for Petrie and took my place in the House of Representatives. It was approximately two years ago that I made my first speech in this House, in December 2013. There are a lot of people in the Petrie electorate who go about their lives on a daily basis and who showed faith in me. They are raising their families, they are paying off their houses, they are building relationships with their kids, they are going to work, they are paying their taxes and they are doing great things for the community. We are very blessed to live in a country with a stable environment and a great democratic system, and I am certainly proud to have been the member for Petrie for the last couple of years. I would like to use this time as a bit of a reflection, and I look forward to delivering more over the next 12 months.

We have delivered a lot nationally over the last couple of years. The federal coalition government has achieved a lot. Despite what the previous member said, I think that through infrastructure funding throughout this country—not just in my home state of Queensland but in all the states, up in the northern part of Australia, the Territory, North Queensland and WA, and throughout the southern states, including Tasmania—we have delivered a lot.

Border protection, of course, has been a fundamental plank in change we have seen in the last couple of years. Australia has been able to take back its sovereignty as a nation and not allow people to just rock on up by boat. We have put the people-smuggling trade out of business. There were 1,200 deaths at sea over that time. There has been a lot achieved in that area, and I am proud to be part of that particularly because of the fact that when we came into government two years ago there were 2,000 children in detention and the minister said the other day that we are down to 75. We want to get that to zero, as was the case under the former Howard coalition government when they left office in November 2007.

We have had record funding for schools and health right across this nation over the last couple of years. That has been very significant as well, and I will touch on that locally in a moment. Environmentally, we have been able to meet our targets with the RET and we have seen the Green Army rolled out as well. There has been increased funding for defence as well. The former speaker spoke about cuts; well, the former Labor government cut the guts out of defence. I had some people recently come and see me about shipbuilding in this nation, concerned that there were no projects for shipbuilding, and that is because the former Labor government cut it and ordered no projects over that time. We have recently been able to order some more frigates. That will start to take place in 2020. Believe it or not, people in the Petrie electorate care about that. They want to see ships built locally and the defence budget restored under this government. Ship orders are an important part of that.

We have been able to look at the debt and deficit disaster that we were left with under Labor and try to make some changes there to address that so that we do not leave spiralling debt to future generations, but there is a lot more to do. We are currently paying $12 billion—or just over—a year in interest only. The people in the gallery can imagine what we could do with that money if, like when the Howard government left, we were not paying that $12 billion in interest. I say to the Senate and to those opposite: we need to look at what we can do as a nation to make savings and to be very productive with taxpayers' money. That means working together with those opposite in the House and the Senate to make sure we can make legitimate savings in this place to benefit taxpayers right across the nation so that the next generation is not left to fund the interest bill for the generations that are here today.

Locally, of course—it is not just nationally—we have been able to achieve a lot throughout the federal seat of Petrie. We have seen infrastructure funding with the Gateway Motorway. One billion dollars was promised to upgrade the Gateway Motorway. We will see that go from four to six lanes from the Brisbane River right through to Bracken Ridge. That is very important because one of the fastest-growing areas in the country is the area that I represent and the north Brisbane area as well. So it is very important what the federal government has been able to achieve with the Gateway Motorway, whilst it continues to be built over the next 18 months, for the people in the southern part of my electorate and in particular around that Bracken Ridge, Fitzgibbon, Carseldine, Aspley, Bridgeman Downs and Balls Hills area. They really benefit from better funding for the Gateway Motorway.

There is also an intersection at Carseldine which I fought hard to ensure got an upgrade. That is at Beams Road and Lacey Road, a very dangerous intersection which we, along with the local councillor, were able to lobby for to see recently upgraded. I note that we have a Carseldine resident here in the gallery today: Justin Shemish. It is great to see you here, Justin. I am sure that you will benefit when you drive through that intersection there at Carseldine. That is something that we were able to fight for and deliver locally.

There are sporting facilities down in Bracken Ridge sporting grounds. We have been able to upgrade the lighting capacity down there as young sportspeople go down there to play with Little Athletics and with cricket. That was a promise at the last election which is now up and running and fully funded.

Of course, the NBN has continued to roll out at a much more productive pace in the last couple of years. One of the first areas in my electorate is down in the Carseldine, Fitzgibbon and Aspley area, where the NBN is now connected at a very timely pace and people are able to jump onto that. The good news is that parts of Moreton Bay—70 per cent of my electorate is in Moreton Bay—will also have the NBN rolled out completely and delivered by the end of 2017. I have been particularly passionate about ensuring that the NBN is rolled out in North Lakes, Mango Hill and Griffin—in those really-fast-growing areas in my electorate just north of Brisbane. We have people moving in there every week, lots of housing developments and lots of businesses moving into that area, and to have stable communications is very important. I note that in the third quarter this year we have got another 5,000 homes being connected with better internet services in Mango Hill and North Lakes between July and September. That build will take about six months, and then those people will be onto it quickly as well. I want to thank the Prime Minister for working with me over the last couple of years in his role as Prime Minister but also as Minister for Communications and also thank the current communications minister, whom I spoke to yesterday about the importance of better NBN for North Lakes, Mango Hill and Griffin in particular.

The Moreton Bay Rail Link is a very important project. They have been waiting probably a hundred years for a large infrastructure project like that. Many different governments promised it. It was announced in 2010, but this federal coalition government funded half of that in the last two years. Some $500 million is being spent on the Moreton Bay Rail Link in the federal seats of Petrie and Dickson. That is a very important step. I was at Kippa-Ring station just last week to inspect it, and I want to thank Queensland's Department of Transport and Main Roads for the significant work they have done in ensuring that the project is built in a timely manner under budget. They have spent taxpayers' money well in this project, and I want to thank TMR, the previous state government and the current state government as well as the council for what they have been able to do there.

The electrified trains have been tested and the handover for the rail will happen in the next few months, with an opening in June this year. It means that people in areas like Kippa-Ring, Rothwell, Mango Hill and Murrumba Downs will be able to jump on a train rather than battle traffic in a car. People in Kippa-Ring will be in Brisbane within 55 minutes—shorter for the stations a bit closer to the city. I am very proud of the fact that the $500 million we have spent there in the last two years will be delivered, despite the previous federal member for Petrie saying that it would never happen. That is an important piece of infrastructure for my electorate.

I want to talk about the environment as well, because we have been able to deliver great things for the environment in the Petrie electorate. I was working closely with the environment groups and I want to thank them for what they have been able to achieve with the Green Army projects at Hays Inlet, the North Lakes reserves and also down at Osprey House in Griffin, which is just about to kick off. We have been able to do a lot of good things for the environment, with native vegetation replanted, weeds removed and bird boxes and possum boxes put in place. A whole lot of things are happening there. Many of the young people that have worked on those Green Army projects have gone on to find full-time work.

The Safer Streets Program has rolled out, with CCTV through the Margate CBD on the peninsula as well as at Suttons Beach and the Police-Citizens Youth Club at Redcliffe, which has been great. There are more projects on the way. I have been working with the local police in Deception Bay, Carseldine, Sandgate and Bracken Ridge, and we hope to get those projects rolled out as well. The Dolphin Stadium has been kicked off, with a $4 million contribution from the federal coalition government to help with local jobs and tourism. When the Dolphin Stadium is built later this year, it will combine perfectly with the Moreton Bay rail link, which will also open at that time. It will bring more people out to the games as well as provide tourism opportunities for conferences, along with the Murri rugby league carnival that is held each year. I know that Peninsula Power soccer is also looking to have their home games at the Dolphin Stadium.

The Deception Bay PCYC has been ignored by Labor for decades. At the last election we were able to get a $450,000 commitment to upgrade their gym. I thank the federal member for Groom, Ian Macfarlane, who was able to help me with that project. It is now built and providing an income-producing asset for the Police-Citizens Youth Club at Deception Bay. Deception Bay is a great area, with people that are working hard—aspirational people that have goals, that want to achieve a better lot in life. I say to them: you can do that. If it is study you want to do, if you want to go to university or if you want to achieve a trade, you can do that. No matter what your circumstances are or what your upbringing, you can certainly achieve that in our great country.

The federal government has promised $11 million to assist the state government with the roundabout at Rothwell. I continue to call upon the state government to get that funding sorted out and underway so that we can get that roundabout built quickly. There has been a massive gridlock at Boundary Road. We were able to achieve $84 million to upgrade the bridge from four lanes to six lanes, which will also be starting this year.

So there has been a lot done over the last couple of years. But I would say to the people of Petrie: there is a lot more still to achieve. We know that jobs are important. We want to make sure that jobs continue to roll out across the country. One of the national achievements I did not touch on earlier was agriculture, with live cattle exports having just about tripled under our government after what happened under the previous government. Whilst there is no agriculture in my electorate, the fact that that happens at a national level provides jobs throughout the country that flow into the Petrie electorate. The Job Seeker Boot Camp was run at the end of last year, and there will be another one running soon. I say to the people of Petrie: we continue to want to see growth, and that will provide jobs for our young people.

I support the Moreton Bay Regional Council's plan for a university at the old Petrie paper mill, because I believe in the old saying 'out of sight, out of mind'. The closest university to my electorate is the Australian Catholic University down in Banyo, in the Lilley electorate, and then you have to go to QUT in the city. If we can get that university funded and up and running in the next few years, there will be more younger people who, when they leave year 12, will be able to say, 'Let's jump on the new rail link and travel out to Petrie to get an education.' Such an education is, of course, 60 per cent funded by the federal government and 40 per cent by HECS. So there is a bright future for young people in my electorate.

I thank the previous generation—the pensioners and the self-funded retirees—for what you have done for this nation and for what you have passed on to young people. I say to that generation that, as I have been out and about in the last couple of years presenting the Petrie Shield for academic excellence, sporting achievement and community service at some 36 schools, I have seen a lot of young people who are going to make a great contribution to this country. I thank the people of Petrie and I look forward to working hard over the next 12 months. (Time expired)

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Vocational Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am pleased to take the opportunity to speak in this cognate debate on the appropriation bills before the House today to give a brief context to the bills and then go to some specific issues relating to both my shadow portfolio and my local area. The appropriation bills before us seek to appropriate $2.2 billion in the 2015-16 financial year and they of course reflect the changes that were a result of the Mid-Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook that was released by the government at the end of last year, on 15 December.

With the release of MYEFO at the end of last year—I know there has been a revolving door of personalities in the various positions, spruiking their economic credentials—it was claimed that we would see significant improvements in the budget and the economy, first under the Abbott government, with the Hockey treasurership, and then under the Turnbull government, with the Morrison treasurership. Yet we have not seen that. In fact, quite the opposite is the case. The 2015-16 MYEFO told us that the deficit is higher. There is a blow-out of $26 billion over the forward estimates and a blow-out of $120 million per day between the 2015-16 budget and the 2015-16 MYEFO statement. Net debt for 2016-17 is nearly $100 billion higher than what was forecast in the 2013 PEFO—the statement of the fiscal situation at the time of the election. Gross debt is headed to $550 billion by the end of the forward estimates, and economic growth has been slashed.

Far from there being any good news in the MYEFO, at the end of last year we saw a continuation of the failure of this government to deliver on the things it promised before the election, in terms of both budget responsibility and economic growth. This is on the back of figures that show that the economy has been deteriorating in some very important sectors under this government. Most significantly, living standards, as measured by disposable income per capita, have been falling for six consecutive quarters. The reality for people in each of our electorates across the country, and it is reflected in the sorts of comments you hear when you are out and about at street stalls, door knocking and at community functions, is that they are under financial pressure. This government has only been contributing to that.

I should also make the point that capital expenditure is falling, and despite what some might think that is not just in the mining sector. There is a significant issue there, because if capital expenditure slows it affects opportunities for job growth. Consumer and business confidence levels are far lower than they were when this government took office, promising to inject confidence back into the economy. It may well be the most exciting time to be an Australian, but that excitement is obviously based on anxiety and concern—not on optimism and confidence; we are not seeing any of that reflected in data that is coming out on economic performance. We should not be surprised about levels of confidence because confidence has a lot to do with the messages and signals people get from government. When you have the sort of chaos and change and uncertainty that has been going on for just on two years now, of course that contributes to a lack of confidence across the broader community and has an impact on the economy.

Now we have a Prime Minister who just floats thought bubbles and has conversations, without providing any sense of leadership direction to people about action he wants to take to improve the economy. It is not enough to say you are all about innovation and excitement. That does not deliver outcomes. It is not surprising that we have seen these sorts of results in confidence levels as well, because people would be very confused not only by who makes up the decision making frontbenchers—we see more turmoil today—but also by what it is they are actually about. What is their jobs plan, what is their economic plan, what is their taxation plan? Conversations do not deliver, so we need to see exactly what the Prime Minister is intending. It is important to allay people's fears, because people are clearly looking at their direct experience of what the government said before the election, the sorts of promises and commitments that they made, and their abject failure to deliver on those. No wonder people are very confused by this government in all its iterations.

I turn to the MYEFO statement itself. In my own shadow portfolio, it was concerning to see that we have more budget decisions that go directly to cutting funds for the skills sector. I have yet to see a decision made by this government that is about injecting and boosting support for the skills sector. Over two years they have cut $2 billion out of the skills budget. The previous speaker, the member for Petrie, spoke about the importance of giving young people in his area an opportunity to get training and apprenticeships. Well, it takes more than talk and optimism—you actually have to invest. We have seen exactly the opposite to that. In MYEFO we saw a further cut in this sector of $400 million, taking cuts to nearly $2.5 billion since this government was elected.

In particular, there has been a cut of $273.8 million over four years from the Industry Skills Fund. In government Labor had a National Workforce Development Fund that was directly targeted at supporting the upskilling of existing workers so that not only their own skills but also the capacity of the business they worked for could be increased so they could innovate and adapt to the demands of the future. It funded really important programs, in particular combining literacy and numeracy skills with vocationally related skills for the workplace. We have only very recently seen the Australian Industry Group again come out and say there are major issues with the literacy and numeracy skill levels of many workers. This government in their first budget abolished that program, and they claimed that their new version, the Industry Skills Fund, which had significantly less money, would be delivering on upskilling existing workers. We have not seen it well subscribed to, and in the MYEFO at the end of last year we saw a further cut to the program.

Additionally—this is shocking given how peak bodies like the Australian Industry Group have been talking about the need for literacy and numeracy amongst the adult workforce—the government also cut $122.9 million from the Skills for Education and Employment program, the program that directly provided funding for literacy and numeracy. Again, that was cut in the MYEFO. This has had an enormous impact on the skills sector. We know this because in only the last month reports have come out about some key issues around skills problems and the need for investment from the industry sectors themselves.

But today I particularly want to highlight the $1 billion in cuts that were made to funding programs for apprenticeships. The result, and I have highlighted this to the House before, has been that completions have dropped from 63,000 in June 2013 to just 29,700 in June last year. It is shocking that, directly on this government's watch, the number of apprentices who complete their training has more than halved. There were in fact almost 100,000 fewer apprentices in training. That number had dropped from 407,000 in June 2013 to 308,000 in June 2015.

A significant number of programs that Labor put in place have been abolished. We put those in place because we are committed to trades training for apprentices, remembering that apprentices cover a wide variety of really important skills that are in demand in the economy. There were programs that were specifically designed to increase commencements, such as access programs for young people who might not have quite got their skills up to the point of being able to compete for an apprenticeship. Such programs enabled them to get the support that they needed to get their skills up to that level and then get the opportunity to access an apprenticeship. There were some fantastic programs being run across the country by people such as the Motor Trades Association, who were doing exactly that in very disadvantaged communities. This government just abolished that. There were also programs designed to support apprentices throughout their apprenticeships so that they improved their opportunities and their capacity to succeed and complete their apprenticeship, such as apprentice mentoring. The government abolished those as well.

Very significantly, recognising that apprentices are on training wages and so sometimes it is a real financial struggle for them, we had a payment system called the Tools For Your Trade program which provided progress payments to apprentices both as an encouragement to stick with the apprenticeship and complete it and in recognition of some of the financial pressures on them. I also draw the House's attention to the significant number of mature-age people now doing apprenticeships because they are looking to either upgrade their skills or transfer into a new job. It is tough if you are doing that on an apprentice wage, and so we had that program in place.

This government abolished the Tools For Your Trade program and offered a loan in the form of a HECS type loan, called a trade support loan, to apprentices. That has been massively undersubscribed because the last thing an apprentice worrying about their financial situation wants to do is take out a loan, particularly when, after completing their apprenticeship, many go on to set up their own small business and may look for financial assistance to do that, and so they do not want to start with a loan already on their back at the start of that process. So we saw that cut by the government as well.

Joint group training programs, which were really significant in terms of providing support through group training associations to small employers who otherwise might not be able to carry an apprentice by themselves, were abolished. I am very pleased to see that some of my state colleagues—for example, in Victoria—are reinvesting in that sort of activity, because cutting those programs was very, very short sighted.

In all of this, we have not heard from the government any mention of our fantastic public TAFE system. It is the backbone of our training sector. It provides the benchmark and the ballast for the system. But the vocational education sector has been in crisis and continues to be in crisis. Today, there are media reports about major private training providers collapsing. The only indication from this government that it has any interest in public providers is its decision to put out a discussion paper to the states, proposing a federal takeover of the entire system and complete deregulation of pricing. In effect, it is exactly a privatisation of the public TAFE system. No wonder the minister ran very quickly from that, when that document was exposed by Fairfax media—because regional and rural members in this place would know very well how valued TAFE is by their communities and how important opportunities for training are to all of their people. To see it directly under threat from the proposition being progressed by the federal government would cause enormous concern across the country.

Again we see through MYEFO and the bills before us the continued story of this government's failure to invest in the skill sector, failure to deliver on apprenticeships and failure to take seriously the real challenges of innovation and transformation in our economy and the need to invest in skills, training and education to deliver on that. In closing, I point out to the Prime Minister—and I acknowledge the Minister for Trade, who has entered the chamber—that, if you want innovation, you really have to understand that it is also about our trade and skill sectors and you have to stop cutting them to the bone.

Jason Wood (La Trobe, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I also rise to make remarks on the appropriation bills. However, I cannot do so without first acknowledging the presence of the Hon. Andrew Robb in the House. We were elected to the parliament in 2004. Andrew is a former federal director of the Liberal Party. I say on my own behalf and on behalf of constituents in La Trobe and right across Victoria—and, in particular, small business and large business—that what the minister has done for trade for this country is truly remarkable. The free trade agreements, particularly the agreement with China, will have a huge impact in helping Australian businesses export to China for many years to come. I wish Minister Robb all the very best for his future, because I have no doubt he will continue to assist and reward Australia in everything he does into the future.

I also must acknowledge the Hon. Warren Truss, the Deputy Prime Minister, who is in the chamber, and I also wish him all the best for the future.

Debate adjourned.