Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Deputy Prime Minister. What is the point of the independent Infrastructure Australia making recommendations to government on transport, water, energy and communications priorities if there is no money in the Building Australia Fund to fund its recommendations?

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the shadow minister for her question and note the presence in the chamber of the American ambassador. One small step for man! Yesterday, it was one giant leap forward for Parkes, which is going to play such a an integral part in the inland rail—a $9.3 billion investment by this government because we get on and we do things. The fact is the inland rail was first suggested in 1890. The first plans were drawn up in the early 1900s, and the Liberals and Nationals are actually building it.

But more to the point of the shadow minister's question, 19 out of 21 projects on the Infrastructure Priority List are funded by the Australian government. Nineteen out of 21—that's not a bad result. This government has significantly transformed the way we invest in infrastructure. We have a $100 billion commitment, a $100 billion investment, in infrastructure right across the country—better roads, better rail, better airports, better seaports. We are getting on with the job of building the infrastructure to, as the Prime Minister said, get Australians home sooner and safer.

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

The member for Ballarat on a point of order.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The point of order is, of course, on relevance. It would be good if the Deputy Prime Minister were actually able to mention the Building Australia Fund.

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

The member for Ballarat can resume her seat. The Deputy Prime Minister is in order, and it is not in order for someone asking a question to demand that part of the question actually be mentioned. That really is without precedent.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The opposition is not on this side of the House, Mr Speaker. I think they thought they were going to be on this side of the House, but this side of the House is actually getting on with the job in our third term, just like we did in our second term and just like we did in our first term of building our future. Building our future—that's what we are doing. The increase in investment has been driven through annual appropriations. We are getting on with the job. You heard the Prime Minister in an earlier answer today talk about the additional $25 billion in our last budget, and this is what you can do—and this is what we will continue to do—when you've got a budget going into surplus. We see the New South Wales coalition government—the Liberals and Nationals in that state—getting on with a $94 billion rollout of infrastructure across four years. That's what you can do when you're in surplus.

Mr Albanese interjecting—

Not 10, I hear the opposition leader talk about. Ten years—it's been 30 since that side actually had a surplus. We are getting on with the job of putting our economic management into surplus, putting our budget into surplus. It's something they could only have a pipedream about. And when we talk of pipedreams and pipelines, we have a pipeline of investment—$100 billion over the next 10 years—and we're getting on with the job. It's creating jobs. What side do those on that side sit on? Do they agree with us? Do they want to get on with getting their people—their constituents—home sooner and safer or do they want to continually object and oppose everything?