John McVeigh (Groom, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Select Committee on Regional Development and Decentralisation's Issues paper fulfils the committee's requirement to present an issues paper to the House on region development and decentralisation as set out in the committee's resolution of appointment. The committee's inquiry is an exciting opportunity for government and nongovernment members of this chamber to work together in the best interests of regional Australia. In particular, it presents an opportunity for members to examine how we can develop and maintain prosperous and sustainable regions, capitalising on the strengths and local resources we know our regions offer.

So much of Australia's economic success rests in the resources and hard work of our regional towns and cities. The select committee has been asked to inquire into and report on best practice approaches to regional development, the decentralisation of Commonwealth entities and supporting corporate decentralisation as well. This issues paper sets out the committee's preliminary research and thinking on these matters. It discusses broad themes such as the history of decentralisation in Australia, place-based approaches to developing our nation's regions, the advantages and disadvantages of decentralisation policy, the role of technology in connecting and diversifying nonmetropolitan areas and the role of public and private investment in supporting and growing Australia's regional and rural towns.

There are lots of rural and regional towns doing great things across the country to foster economic and social development in their communities. Even in the infancy of this inquiry, the committee has consistently heard that rural and regional towns are unique and have different strengths and capacity. These areas will require local, place-based strategies to ensure their development and growth. In my own electorate of Groom, we are meeting rural and regional challenges with significant corporate investment, cooperation among regional councils and capacity to support major infrastructure projects. The committee is looking forward to visiting this and other regional and rural towns to learn more about the strategies used in these areas to support population growth, employment and a viable future.

Decentralisation of Commonwealth departments has received a great deal of attention. Indeed, there is much enthusiasm and capacity in rural and regional Australia to house Commonwealth departments. The committee is mindful that decentralisation is not an end in itself. Regional growth, long-term employment opportunities and sustainability must be the driving factors, along with the improvement of government services.

The key focus for this committee will be on measuring the success of recent decentralisation policy—that is, determining the net benefit of moving government entities from one location to another. In addition to the economic impact of decentralisation policy, the committee plans to examine the family, social and community impact of this approach. The committee will also examine more closely the issue of corporate decentralisation. In particular, the committee is keen to explore how the actions or policies of the Commonwealth can encourage corporate entities to relocate to non-metropolitan areas. For example, what are some of the barriers to relocation? What can be done to remove them?

The committee has identified some examples of private companies establishing a presence in regional Australia and hopes to learn more about the experiences of these companies. The committee is also interested in corporations that have established a base in regional areas only to withdraw at a later date. The committee plans to consult widely during its inquiry and will conduct public hearings in a range of non-metropolitan locations across Australia. To assist the inquiry, the committee is drawing on a number of Australian experts, who will be available as an informal panel to discuss broad issues related to the terms of reference. We look forward to an ongoing conversation with the members of this panel.

I am a passionate supporter of regional Australia and I believe Australia's regions will remain the key to unlocking our growth and our future growth potential as a nation. The work of this select committee can help shape the vision for the future of regional Australia. The committee's issues paper has been designed to provide more information about the matters in the terms of reference. It aims to stimulate thinking and generate ideas about future regional development. The committee hopes that this issues paper will encourage interested people and organisations to make a submission to our inquiry. I commend this issues paper to the House.

Meryl Swanson (Paterson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—I rise today to speak on the issues paper that has been released on regional development and decentralisation. It is an honour to serve as deputy chair of this House of Representatives select committee with the chair, the member for Groom, Dr John McVeigh. From the start, our broad brief has been to explore ways to increase the growth and prosperity of rural and regional Australia. This is a matter that sits at the heart of the wellbeing and fortunes of the people of Paterson, which spans wine country in the west, industry, coalfields, the booming regional city of Maitland, the Williamstown RAAF base and aerospace park, and the blue water wonderland of Port Stephens.

Much of my electorate is in a state of flux and transition as the industrial landscape changes, but now, more than ever, our economic success rests with the skills that can be captured and the work that can be obtained. One line of thought is simply to relocate government departments from Canberra to the regions. But decentralisation isn't an economic plan in and of itself, and there are a multitude of factors that determine the success of decentralisation. This was noted in the 2015 Regional Australia Institute discussion paper, TheFuture of Regional Australia: Change on Our Terms, which made the key finding that government has diminishing control over the factors that shape Australia's regions.

For a stark example of ill-thought-out decentralisation, we need look no further than the Deputy Prime Minister's controversial and ultimately failed decision to move a government crop and veterinary chemical agency to his own electorate. The agency shed jobs, employees were not happy with the forced move, and some workers had to work out of a local McDonald's because their new office wasn't ready.

The fallout from the agriculture minister's grand decentralisation vision was, I believe, pivotal in sparking this select committee investigation. If nothing else, we learnt that this was not the platform for an arbitrary decision. It requires investigation and it requires consultation, analysis and, crucially, planning. As such, our brief as a committee has been to inquire into and report on best practice approaches to regional development and the decentralisation of Commonwealth entities and ways to support corporate decentralisation. In some cases, that may mean enabling towns to provide their citizens with infrastructure that every community needs to thrive—things like roads, rail, bridges, schools, public transport, educational opportunities, health care and support across different life stages.

Beyond that, the committee will travel to hear firsthand about what towns and cities believe they need to succeed. I have publicly encouraged every council in my electorate to put forward a submission, explaining how their LGA is suited to and can meet the need of government functions. On the flipside, the inquiry has asked all government departments to indicate whether or not they are suitable to move at all or in part some of their operations to the regions. If, indeed, they feel their operations are unsuitable, they have been asked to quantify that as well.

I'm broadly supportive of decentralisation and the concept of sharing the wealth across our wide, brown land. I was born and bred in the Hunter Valley coalfields and have long fought for families and friends in my regional community to reap the same benefits of health, education, transport and services as their city cousins. Of course, we want more people in our towns, more customers in our shops, more volunteers for our local firefighting brigades and more kids to play in sporting teams and to attend school.

As federal parliamentarians, we have a responsibility to make sure regional and rural areas and their communities are not left out of our nation's planning. I am loath, however, to uproot families and shift them to the country or expect an existing community to simply assimilate a great chunk of potentially disgruntled neighbours into their tight-knit communities because one government minister thinks a pork barrel might be good. This is not a one-size-fits-all situation and we impose our will on others at our peril. I eagerly await the interim report in December and the final report in February of next year. We can then move towards a plan to boost our regions in a sensible and productive way, and I am pleased and committed to work with this committee.

John McVeigh (Groom, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the House take note of the report.

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

In accordance with standing order 39, the debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.