Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) welcomes the Government's action to make our cities better places to live in and do business through ongoing City Deal developments in Townsville, Launceston, Western Sydney and Darwin;

(2) notes that:

(a) City Deals:

  (i) bring together all three levels of Government to develop collective plans for growth with a focus on jobs, housing, transport and the environment; and

  (ii) are already delivering firm commitments and real benefits for communities, including the $250 million North Queensland Stadium, the Townsville Eastern Access Rail Corridor, movement of the University of Tasmania's main campus and the rejuvenation of the CBD in Launceston; and

  (b) further benefits through City Deals are under development, including the Western Sydney Housing Package and the redevelopment of Paterson Barracks in Launceston;

(3) commends the Government for continuing to encourage and pursue new City Deals with other regional cities around Australia, including areas such as the Sunshine Coast; and

(4) encourages state and territory governments and local councils in regional cities, especially on the Sunshine Coast, to work closely with their local Members of Parliament and the Assistant

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Steve Georganas (Hindmarsh, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Last week I held 14 listening posts around my electorate. I spoke to scores of people in Landsborough, Mooloolah, Bellvista, Mooloolaba, Glass House Mountains, Golden Beach, Kawana Waters, Eudlo, Caloundra, Beerwah, Currimundi, Maleny and Peachester. It was instructive and energising. The people of Fisher are full of fantastic ideas and useful feedback, and I intend to speak about the issues that they raised throughout the coming sitting weeks.

As I move this motion, one theme that emerged from my listening posts comes to mind. The people of Fisher want their three tiers of government—federal, state and local—to work together. They are not interested in what tier of government has jurisdiction over a particular issue or which of us is in charge. The people of Fisher want us to cooperate as a team in their best interests and to get on with the job of delivering the infrastructure they need.

It's for this reason that the government identified the City Deals concept as one which could make a real difference for our changing communities. In early 2016 the then Assistant Minister for Cities and Digital Transformation released our cities agenda as one of the very first priorities of the new Turnbull government. This agenda, in effect, declared the Commonwealth's door open for state premiers, local mayors and the private sector to join us in a coordinated and effective approach to long-term planning. This government has provided a platform for cooperative long-term infrastructure investment, both public and private, which can help our urban economies to grow. In an era of what has been called 'Punch and Judy' politics, where fast news cycles, limited media resources and social media outrage encourage a partisan point-scoring approach, this was a bold agenda and one for which the government should be congratulated.

City Deals incorporate the best of the Turnbull government's approach to policy development. Each deal is founded on a defined area and clear outcomes, specific investments linked to specific reform, clear governance and accountability, private and public sector partnership, and the measurement of that performance. That is how to deliver lasting change, and I am pleased to say that we are already starting to see the benefits of this approach. We have seen work begin on the new, $250 million North Queensland Stadium under the Townsville City Deal. Local companies have taken up six major contracts on the project, already bringing hundreds of jobs to the community. Two hundred and sixty million dollars has been committed in Launceston to move the University of Tasmania's campus into the city centre and create not only a vibrant and innovative community but 2,700 new jobs. We should welcome, in particular, the fact that the first City Deals have been negotiated with regional cities like Launceston and Townsville. Throughout Australia, many of our regional centres, like my own, are growing and leaving behind their increasingly outdated infrastructure. In others, economic shifts have left communities in need of a new and bold vision which will ensure their prosperity for future generations. For both, City Deals have the potential to create the transformative change that they need. The regions have, rightly, been a focus of the City Deals agenda to date, and they should continue to be in the future.

On that note, I'm happy to able to add for the record that, since I gave notice of this motion, the government has announced that two additional City Deals are progressing toward being established—one in Hobart and another welcome deal with the regional Victorian community of Geelong.

Sarah Henderson (Corangamite, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Hear, hear!

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm glad to see that the member for Corangamite will be speaking shortly about that process, which I know she has worked very hard to establish.

As the minister looks ahead to the next deal, I would ask him to consider that, however it might be structured, the Sunshine Coast is a perfect candidate for involvement. We have a rapidly-growing population and high levels of private investment. We have important infrastructure projects, like upgrades to the North Coast rail, which could transform our region's prosperity, a unitary local council and a unified group of hardworking state and federal representatives, one of whom joins me here today—and he'll no doubt expand on this motion. (Time expired)

Pat Conroy (Shortland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Infrastructure) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Investment in infrastructure is crucial to delivering better outcomes for Australians and boosting economic growth now and into the future. Building a prosperous, livable Australia demands consistent long-term planning to give certainty to business and communities across the country. That is why Labor is focused on developing our cities in conjunction with governments of all levels and across political divides to ensure that we can remain not only gateways to the global economy but also some of the most livable places in the world. As we have seen around the world, it is critical to adopt broadly supported, long-term plans to give the certainty required to attract private sector investment and deliver the outcomes that Australians deserve.

The consensus for achieving these outcomes from planning bodies, researchers and governments around the world is that the establishment of a single governing body that oversees a coordinated policy package for cities is the best way of delivering these results. This vehicle should be funded by all levels of government and operate like the Clean Energy Finance Corporation. That's why Labor when in government created the Major Cities Unit, to bring together a broad range of stakeholders and communities to ensure the best result for cities across the nation. This government, in contrast, has abolished this unit and replaced it with an ineffective and underfunded City Deals initiative. This lack of funding is indicative of this government's infrastructure failings. With an underspend of close to $4 billion over the last three years, this government is failing on infrastructure. Let me repeat that: this government has underspent on its commitments to infrastructure by $4 billion in the last three years alone. They are utter hypocrites on this.

Labor took infrastructure spending to some of its strongest levels since Federation and had spent more as a percentage of GDP than any other OECD country by the time we left office. The City Deals being rolled out by this government in typical Turnbull government fashion are a desperate attempt to detract from their poor track record on infrastructure. City Deals have been highly successful around the world and have the potential to be effective in Australia as well, but they've been starved of funding and the commitment they require to be effective.

The City Deals that have been announced by this government are hardly true City Deals at all. The Launceston and Townsville City Deals are a direct response to infrastructure projects Labor had already committed to with Townsville Stadium and the University of Tasmania. The Western Sydney, Hobart and Northern Territory City Deals are yet to be supported or signed at this stage and are simply all talk. We know that the government is out of touch with the infrastructure needs of Australia. That is why these City Deals have become such a mess. On one hand, the government claims to offer a holistic solution to the issues facing growing cities, but all the while it butchered the National Broadband Network and ignored the growing impacts of climate change. On top of this, there has been little consultation with Labor, either federally or at a state level, to ensure continuity of the City Deals. Labor, on the other hand, knows how City Deals have achieved outcomes elsewhere.

The approach adopted by the coalition will simply not work. To maximise the potential of our great cities, we need to bring together a wide range of relevant partners and work with them to form plans which address all the major issues facing cities in a productive and inclusive way. We cannot afford to say that we cannot invest in renewable energy because it doesn't suit our policy goals or that we won't facilitate reliable, fast internet because it's someone else's fault. It is the responsibility of governments to tackle all these issues head-on. Communities across Australia are looking for leadership on these issues.

A multitude of regions are suffering from inaction because of the government in this space. Rolling out an infrastructure approach in such an arbitrary way across this vast country is insufficient. If this government truly believes in the idea of City Deals, it should come to the table with Labor, the crossbench and key stakeholders and figure out a way to deliver what is needed, not just to where it needs votes. In my electorate, there is a range of projects that could provide immediate and long-term benefits for the Hunter and Central Coast regions, which are being ignored by the government. Any further development of a City Deal program by the federal government needs to go through a review process with the goal of constructing a scheme that has support from both sides of politics and all levels of government. Labor knows this and is keen to work not only with the rest of the parliament but also COAG and the private sector to make all our great cities liveable, affordable and productive.

Labor has a proud record of investing in cities and creating both essential infrastructure projects and living spaces to improve quality of life. We want to continue to build on our long-held view that the Commonwealth can improve our cities by providing direct investment and policy leadership to other levels of government. On the other hand, all we see from the government are buzzwords, talk, more talk and more announcements of deals with no follow-through. Australia and our cities—in fact, our regions as a whole—deserve better.

Sarah Henderson (Corangamite, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's my great pleasure to rise on this motion to celebrate the wonderful policy announcements that have been made by the Turnbull government, including by the Prime Minister two weeks ago when we announced a City Deal for the Geelong region, including our magnificent Great Ocean Road. We heard from the member for Shortland another reason to not vote for Labor at the next election: the Labor Party does not agree with City Deals, even though Labor governments around the nation have warmly embraced this model, which brings together the federal government, state governments and local governments to drive investment and confidence, particularly in infrastructure spending.

It was certainly a great day when we announced our City Deal. There is great excitement from all of the stakeholders—from the local councils, the Committee for Geelong, the Geelong Chamber of Commerce, the chambers of commerce of Apollo Bay and Colac, and the many other stakeholders, including G21. Our City Deal will build on the very significant investment that we have already made in very large, major infrastructure projects across our region: half a billion dollars or so in major rail upgrades, the duplication of the Princess Highway and the upgrade of the Great Ocean Road—a project that the previous Labor government did not support.

If I take onboard the member for Shortland's rhetoric in relation to infrastructure spending, I would say, 'Look at the announcement of our government last year on the regional rail upgrade.' The Commonwealth, the Turnbull government, announced $1.42 billion in regional upgrades, including $225 million—a quarter of a billion dollars—in the Corangamite electorate. Guess what the state Labor's contribution was to that? It was a paltry $150 million. Over the weekend I called on the Daniel Andrews government to match our contribution. We have to drive major infrastructure development and investment into Victoria. One of the biggest reasons it is not happening as it should is that the projects aren't there. We have been waiting two years for a business plan for a regional rail upgrade and the duplication of the rail between South Geelong and Waurn Ponds. We are seeing Daniel Andrews put Victorians on the slow train over that project.

If you consider the Victorian government's and past federal Labor's investment in the Regional Rail Link, it has become an absolute disaster—$4 billion in the Regional Rail Link and it is standing room only. Geelong commuters have been put last on that project. We all know about the abhorrent decision to cancel the East West Link, a project previously supported by the likes of the Leader of the Opposition. Now Daniel Andrews has spent $1.2 billion to cancel that project, which is an absolute disgrace.

We are very proud of our city deal for Geelong, which will also embrace the Great Ocean Road economy, which is such an important part of our region. It builds on the very significant investments we've made in rail but also in state roads. Again, we had to drive this and bring the state Labor government to the table on state road investment. There was: $10 million in total for the Hamilton Highway; $440 million for the Murray Basin Rail Project; $600,000 for the Midland Highway; $3.5 million for the Port of Geelong Access Improvement Package; $600,000 for Grubb Road, the planning for the duplication of Grubb Road in Ocean Grove; and a total of $363 million to duplicate the Princes Highway between Winchelsea and Colac, along with the $100 million in total for the Great Ocean Road upgrade. So we are incredibly proud of the infrastructure investments in our region.

Our city deal is a wonderful policy brought forward by this government. We've now heard that Labor is condemning this policy, which is very regrettable. It's another indication of the Labor Party's wild swing to the Left. I expect also that we'll see a repeat of the performance we saw in 2008, when the Labor Party rejected a deal between Avalon Airport and AirAsia X to allow AirAsia X to fly into Avalon. It was with great pride, yesterday, that Avalon Airport announced it will become an international airport—with great support from our government. It was a very proud day for all Corangamite residents and residents in the Geelong region.

Emma Husar (Lindsay, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

To quote Elvis: 'A little less talk, a little more action, please.' I heard the member for Corangamite say, 'We've made these recommendations,' 'We've made these promises,' and 'We've made these announcements.' But we don't see that they've done anything. They've been in government for five years and they want to come in here—day in, day out—and keep condemning Bill Shorten and the opposition as though they are in charge. I say, let us be in charge. We'll move further than talking points and being a talking head standing up here and talking about what you're going to do and start doing something for the people of this country.

Western Sydney, where I'm from, is home to two million Australians. We are part of this City Deals program. We have hardworking, generous, vibrant communities that contribute to the huge success of our city, our state and our country. We are the third-largest economy, but not enough is being done to support the people I get to represent here. City Deals are designed to bring together the three levels of government, the community and private enterprise in order to create city and place based partnerships.

To have a successful city deal we need a shared vision for growth, reform and improvement, a negotiated and customised approach across the whole of government, transformative investment rather than just saying we're going to do something and writing it on a piece of paper somewhere, institutional and governance reforms for sustained improvement, innovative financing and value capture. But what is the reality for me and for the people living in Western Sydney? We are waiting. We are waiting on the detail; we are waiting on the collaboration. I regularly get to meet with the mayor and the general manager of the city council. We have no detail. They've been asked to sign away on a deal that they've not seen the full effects of and asked to sign on the dotted line without any kind of consultation whatsoever.

City Deals looks great on paper. It's what is going to happen on the ground that will be what makes the difference and what will make a difference to the people who live, work and play in Western Sydney. How out of touch could this mob be when they say they just want the councils to sign off and accept what they're getting! The New South Wales Liberals are spending $2.5 billion on rebuilding stadiums. I was there for a Western Sydney Wanderers game with 10,000 people in a stadium that seats 90,000, and they're complaining that these people have to wait too long to queue up for a pie. What I would say is: try being a patient in the Nepean Hospital, the hospital that is the most under pressure hospital in New South Wales. Try waiting for a surgery; try waiting to have your kid's tonsils taken out. You are waiting for over a year, watching your child in pain, watching them go through infection after infection, missing school time, missing social time and missing crucial development time. And this lot is worried about waiting in a queue for a pie. Give me a break.

The people of Western Sydney and Lindsay need investment. We need trains—and preferably, if we're not being too wishful in our thinking here, trains that run on time, are air-conditioned and are not at standing room only when they arrive to pick up passengers at Penrith train station. The changes to the train timetable add about 15 minutes for commuters already spending over an hour commuting one way. We need the north-south rail link to support growth for Western Sydney and open up a huge economic opportunity by linking the north and the south. We need long overdue public transport links for those who live in these areas and have suffered a public transport deficit. We need equitable—not equal but equitable—access to transport. Western Sydney needs investment in the Outer Sydney Orbital, the M9, which needs to be done without more tolls. We are already facing a cost of living that is two per cent higher than that of our cousins who live closer to the city. The new M4 toll, the toll we already pay for, is back for another 43 years, and you only need to drive down that road to see that people are not using it, because they cannot afford the extra cost burden that it adds each year to their already burdensome and bulging household budget.

We already have a major jobs and infrastructure deficit. To improve people's lifestyles and the outcomes for their families and themselves, we need jobs that people only have to commute half an hour for. Workers in Lindsay who are based in Sydney face a two-hour commute one way. That's an extra four hours a day just commuting to and from work. I often get the Western Sydney slag stereotype and people saying that people in my electorate don't work hard enough. When you add four hours to their already eight-hour work day, they are working incredibly hard under incredible pressure. Western Sydney needs a city deal that serves them, is made by them and is represented by them. People sitting at the table making decisions about Western Sydney should be from Western Sydney. We should not be lectured to by those in the east telling us what we deserve.

Ted O'Brien (Fairfax, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm delighted that the parliament has begun for 2018. Already the Labor Party is claiming Bill Shorten is Elvis Presley, if you were to take it from the former Speaker and this ludicrous claim that the coalition government is only talking and not acting on infrastructure. To put that to rest, take just my part of the world, the Sunshine Coast. There is over $920 million of construction currently underway on the Bruce Highway north of Caloundra Road. There is $187 million currently under business case—money already allocated—for the Maroochydore interchange. There is a $181 million concessional loan for an upgrade of the Sunshine Coast Airport and a quarter of a million dollars for a full feasibility study to bring an optic cable onto the Sunshine Coast. This is real money, real delivery, real infrastructure. That is precisely what the Turnbull government continues to deliver.

But we're here today in support of a motion put by my colleague the member for Fisher in relation to City Deals. Now, as my colleague laid out very articulately, how often do we as parliamentarians hear people bemoan the fact that the three tiers of government often don't work together? How often do we hear people talk about the need for greater vision and long-term thinking? I've been hearing that all my life. People are crying out for governments to have vision, for tiers of government to work together and for the private sector and the community to engage with government in the delivery of those visions.

In comes the Turnbull coalition government and its Smart Cities framework, and it is precisely that aim which this framework delivers on. It does so with three pillars: one being smart investment; another, smart technology; and, lastly, smart policy. With smart investment you see, through the Smart Cities Plan framework, encouragement for us to leverage our balance sheet and pursue innovative financing options, including value capture. With smart technology you see the need for us to use data, particularly what's referred to as 'big data', and the need for us to have greater technological solutions. With smart policy you see ideas such as the city plan, or, as we otherwise refer to it, City Deals.

Already the Turnbull government has delivered in this regard, with deals done for Townsville and Launceston; Western Sydney is underway; and MOUs were signed recently for Geelong and Hobart. You see, what we have reflected in the City Deals process is the opportunity not just for those three tiers of government to work together but also to unlock more capital from the private sector. We have the opportunity to actually have capital cities or regions establish a very set vision for what their future is and then pull on every lever possible to deliver on that vision. You see a consultative approach which means the community is carried along with its leaders. This is precisely what the City Deals process delivers.

I would also make the point that, true to this coalition government's DNA, City Deals are being considered not just for capital cities but also for regional areas. That is why I also support the member for Fisher's interest in the Sunshine Coast as a potential area for a City Deal—an area that I believe can be the healthiest place on earth; a simple vision. But we are a region, like many across Australia, that does struggle with high population growth—and, of course, one of our pain points is in fact a lack of housing affordability. In fact, the least affordable place in Australia happens to be my region. Now, how we solve some of these bigger problems is a conundrum that not one tier of government can deal with; you require all three to work together. You require the private sector. You require the community. That is precisely what the City Deal construct delivers on, and it's why I stand here today in support.

Susan Templeman (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Making our cities a better place to live and to work sounds like a very noble idea. But, after doing some in-depth research on the Western Sydney City Deal, which took about two minutes because of the complete lack of detail, I had a bit of a flashback. I pictured my children expectantly waiting to unwrap a Kinder Surprise, and then opening their Kinder Surprise to find that, actually, there was nothing inside of it. You can imagine the disappointment, because this is something that's not just about the chocolate; it's about what comes inside. If they'd wanted chocolate, they could have gone for a chocolate frog. So, okay, they still get chocolate, but, sadly, it's a really hollow experience—and that, for me, pretty much sums up these so-called City Deals. There's a lot of expectation—it's beautiful packaging—but it's pretty empty inside.

As the member for Macquarie, which encompasses the Blue Mountains and the Hawkesbury, time and time again our Kinder Surprises don't have a toy. Sometimes we don't even get the chocolate; we just get the foil, the words on the outside telling us what's inside and how great it's going to be—but usually it's great for everybody but us. From trains to bridges to housing to health care, we are expected to continually make sacrifices for the benefit of those not as west as us. We're too far west to benefit from investment in the city but too close to the city to be compensated through regional funding and grants, and so my community continues to run second. The City Deals program is no exception. There is no clear process, there is no clear source of funding and there are no clear outcomes. There is real apprehension that the City Deals funding will be targeted towards Penrith and other identified strategic centres in the west, like Blacktown, Liverpool and Campbelltown, rather than the Blue Mountains and Hawkesbury. This is particularly the case given the focus in the draft District Plans that the Greater Sydney Commission's devised and the limited attention paid to the local government areas that don't have strategic centres or major employment centres. The New South Wales government indicates that these draft plans will form the basis of the City Deals agreements.

Let's be clear—neither the Blue Mountains nor the Hawkesbury is even identified in the key western city map in the Greater Sydney Commission draft plan. Now, that's the one on page 26, in case you're looking. There is not a mention of the Blue Mountains or Hawkesbury on that map. It doesn't even bother giving them a name, or in the definition of what the western city is—so you can understand our concerns. Are we just the backyard? Thanks to flood plains and world heritage, you can't shove more houses in us.

How will the lack of recognition affect obtaining funding from this western City Deal? The hefty Western Sydney City Deal document—all one page of it—talks about improved environmental and liveability outcomes. Yet, at the very first hurdle, this objective will not be achieved because this government is not putting a curfew on Badgerys Creek airport. How does the government's promise of improved environmental and liveability outcomes happen as a result of aircraft noise 24 hours a day, seven days a week. They're not even interested in us maintaining our current liveability, let alone improving it.

This is not personal opinion. This is reality. We are close enough to the site of Western Sydney Airport to be under a noisy flight path and have planes flying over our beautiful World Heritage Area and quaint villages at all hours, but we are too far away to benefit from any job creation or improved infrastructure and investment. If we are to be lumbered with an airport that reduces our liveability, I would support the comments by Blue Mountains City Council in its City Deal submission, that it is reasonable to expect that there is some return for the impacts from Western Sydney Airport. One that would be essential is that the rail connection between the airport and St Marys be an integral part of the package, and be delivered from day 1. As for the Hawkesbury, the need is great. If the City Deals are to have any substance at all they must address the need for investment in new flood resilient bridges, without destroying the very thing that makes the Hawkesbury liveable: its agricultural and its heritage. While it says little about the Windsor-Richmond area, it does talks about improving cultural experiences. If you can't use a deal like this to save the oldest public square in Australia and convict-made infrastructure, then it isn't a deal worth having.

Keith Pitt (Hinkler, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The one thing we know about City Deals is that everybody wants one. I have certainly heard contributions this morning. Everyone seems keen to get their City Deal, and that includes me. I am here supporting the private member's business put forward by Mr Wallace, the member for Fisher—although I do have a few problems with section 3 in that I don't think the Sunshine Coast should be the priority for City Deals across the country. I spoke with the shareholding minister, Angus Taylor, about six months ago about the potential for putting together a regional deal which uses more than just one town or just one city to try and include more numbers and, of course, find those areas in the economy that we can absolutely build on and drive what is essential, particularly in regional areas of our country, and that is jobs.

My region of Hinkler is based around the two major cities of Bundaberg and Hervey Bay, but Wide Bay-Burnett has a population of around 270,000 people. The three cities in that region are: Bundaberg, at around 93,000; Hervey, at 52,000 and the city of Maryborough, which is in the seat of Wide Bay, at around 28,000. That's around 173,000 individuals in the population just in that triangle.

What you may not know is that we also have some levels, some numbers and some statistics which are not that strong and not that supportive. They are around unemployment and median income. In fact, a recent report that was put out by the Local Government Association identified the area of Wide Bay as, once again, being the area of the lowest per capita income in this country, as it has been for some 20 years. As the local member, I find that unacceptable. As a member of the federal parliament I know that there are places here, ministries and buckets of money that can change policies and make a difference to people. That is our purpose as members of parliament. We are here to try and advantage and move forward our constituents and the people we represent.

A City Deal for those regions is a great opportunity. We can build on our strengths. Around Bundaberg those are in agriculture, and around Hervey Bay—the best place in the country to see whales—they are in tourism. Then there is the great Fraser Island, just on the outside of my electorate, and the city of Maryborough, which of course is one of the greatest industrial workhorses in this nation. It is a wonderful industrial city in the seat of Wide Bay, and I acknowledge the member for Wide Bay, Llew O'Brien. But we definitely need some help. The numbers are not strong. This place is somewhere where we can do something about it. The unemployment rate adjusted—what's called the NIEIR unemployment rate, which excludes disability pensions in the region—is at 16.7 per cent. It is the highest in the country. I find that unacceptable. It has been in the top three for some 20 years. To have a per capita income of some $34,000—just $34,000—is also unacceptable. We need to drive jobs into that region, and the cities program provides those opportunities.

So I would say to the shareholding minister, who obviously changed before Christmas, that we're coming to see you. We did some great work with Angus Taylor in building this up. I think there is an opportunity to put those three cities together and put together a deal which builds across all levels of government. The people I represent are sick of the arguments between the state government and the federal government and between local government and state government. The good thing about a City Deal is that it puts those three layers of government together and commits them to a plan. It commits them to delivering money, to delivering services and to delivering infrastructure.

I have seen dozens of reports, and I know there are more reports underway. We don't need more reports. What we need is infrastructure and high-paying jobs. The potential is there. We can build around the Bundaberg port. We can build more infrastructure for tourism into that great city of Hervey Bay. We can absolutely look to build a level 5 training hospital in the city of Bundaberg that can service over 300,000 people from Rockhampton to Gympie. The evidence that's been put before me is that we are transferring over 1,000 patients via the RFDS to Brisbane every single year because we cannot provide those essential peak services from medical specialists. So we absolutely need to act on that. Unfortunately, the stench from 'Dr Death', Jayant Patel, at the Bundaberg Hospital still hangs around our local hospitals. I congratulate our local hospitals. They work so hard, and we are here to support them.

There are opportunities around our port, our hospitals and our tourism, but we need to put those structures together—and this is one way that we can do it. I again encourage the minister—who I am meeting with this week—to get this on the table. This year, 2018, needs to be the year of delivery. The people I represent are tired of talk. They want action. Our job is to deliver for them and to make their lives better, and these opportunities are here and here now.

Ross Hart (Bass, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm very pleased to be able to speak on this motion today because Launceston, in my electorate of Bass, is one of the four regional locations that will benefit from ongoing City Deal developments. It is, however, vitally important to note that the genesis of the Launceston City Deal was the Labor commitment to the UTAS transformation project, a project which is about much more than infrastructure and buildings but has the opportunity to transform educational outcomes in northern Tasmania. I've spoken often about how strategic investment in northern Tasmania can unlock the potential for a renewed focus on industry, advanced manufacturing and innovation, which will in turn provide a clear pathway for greater educational and economic opportunities for the region. This is, on the one hand, a return to the proud heritage of northern Tasmania and also a repositioning of Tasmania as part of a smart, innovative, decentralised digital future.

The scope of the city deal needs to be unpacked, as it were, to understand its significant potential to make positive change in my community: firstly, the relocation of the University of Tasmania's Newnham campus to the new site at Inveresk, transforming the city centre and broader region and establishing Launceston as a vibrant university city; secondly, the implementation of the City Heart Project, revitalising the CBD through improved public spaces, transport and signage, allowing for greater support of events and improved business capability; and the redevelopment of the heritage listed Paterson Barracks, which will also be progressed under the city deal. I really emphasise the importance of the delivery of the Northern Suburbs Revitalisation Plan, because this is an area of historical disadvantage. It's necessary to improve employment, infrastructure, public space, transport and land use in the city's north and implement this through to 2022.

Finally, we need to establish a Tamar Estuary management task force to oversee the development of a river health action plan by the end of 2017. This will involve investment of $2 million in priority actions identified in the river health action plan to reduce pollution in the Tamar Estuary. It is also vitally important to note that Labor at the last election committed $75 million towards a Launceston sewerage improvement plan, something that was not matched by the coalition government. Notwithstanding that, the city deal is an opportunity for the benefit of long-term investment to flow into northern Tasmania.

It's vitally important that government is held accountable, particularly this government, with respect to its commitments under the city deal. As with many large and complex projects, it's important to engage with and address community concerns. There are some, for example, who question the wisdom of the move of the university campus to the Inveresk site, citing, for example, issues with traffic and flood mitigation and the importance for UTAS to maintain its commitment to academic courses and research on the northern campus rather than the significant cost of the development of the new campus.

I have consistently urged those who are concerned about these matters to engage with UTAS and also with the Launceston City Council consultation and master planning processes, particularly with respect to the issues of traffic and local amenity. The parties to the funding deeds will be held accountable to ensure that the northern Tasmanian community is able to maximise the benefits associated with the city deal. I'm very pleased to note the commitment by a majority Rebecca White Labor government, if elected, to a comprehensive traffic modelling study in the greater Launceston area and the replacement of the Charles Street Bridge, a particular choke point in traffic from the Launceston CBD to the northern suburbs. The Labor northern Tasmania package also includes support for important projects such as reimagining the gorge and aspects of Launceston City Council's future plans for City Heart, including connectivity between the CBD and Inveresk. Above all, the Launceston City Deal is an opportunity for Launceston to take its place as one of the great regional cities in Australia, if not the world, with a vibrant academic community closely linked with industry, the cultural heritage of the region respected and celebrated and, most importantly, the elevation of education as the key driver of both economic growth and a sense of community.

It's perfectly appropriate that we have the shadow minister here when we're talking about infrastructure and about this government's failure when it comes to delivering on infrastructure. When it comes to infrastructure, everything it touches is either delayed or underrealised. It is vitally important that the promise of this city deal is realised. We have in Northern Tasmania, particularly in my electorate of Bass, an area that has great potential, but it needs to realise that potential through increased educational attainment and the delivery of key infrastructure.

Debate adjourned.