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

As part of our plan to secure Australia's world-leading economic recovery, we are investing in major infrastructure projects right across the country. Consider the scale of these investments: $2 billion for construction of east and west sections of the Great Western Highway from Katoomba to Lithgow in New South Wales; $2 billion to deliver a new Melbourne intermodal terminal; $400 million in additional funding for the Bruce Highway in Queensland; $237½ million for the METRONET Hamilton Street and Wharf Street grade separations and elevations of associated stations in Western Australia; $161.6 million for the Truro bypass in South Australia; an additional $150 million for the national network highways in the Northern Territory; $80 million for Bass Highway safety and freight efficiency upgrades in Tasmania; and $26½ million for the duplication of William Hovell Drive in the Australian Capital Territory. They're big figures, but what they are doing is enabling people to get where they need to be sooner and more safely, and they're also saving lives.

Other works are progressing. Generation-defining projects such as the Western Sydney airport will be complete and open in 2026. We're co-investing in the Sydney Metro-Western Sydney airport rail and the much-needed Melbourne Airport rail link. Inland Rail will revolutionise how we move freight across eastern Australia, intersecting with the east-to-west link. A new study shows freight costs will be slashed by up to 44 per cent. With bilateral trade deals now covering more than 70 per cent of our exports, and with more to come—and, of course, with yesterday's great Australia-United Kingdom free trade in-principle agreement—Inland Rail could not be better timed. As I mentioned, this budget commits to the intermodal freight terminal in Melbourne, which will support both the Victorian and the Australian freight networks. This means jobs—up to 1,350 during peak construction and a further 550 during peak operation. Quality infrastructure will boost productivity and underpin our communities.

Road safety, as I mentioned, is a paramount objective for us. I made this clear last year when I committed $2 billion over 18 months for road safety projects right across the nation. Half of this money was for projects with life-saving benefits to be finished by the end of this month. The 2021-22 budget builds on their success, delivering an extra $1,000 million—$1 billion—into what is now a $3 billion Road Safety Program. This new funding will support 4½ thousand jobs, taking the total number of jobs around Australia supported by the Road Safety Program to 13,500.

Water is the lifeblood of our nation. Through the National Water Grid, the government continues to deliver, boosting water security for communities and industries. In this budget there is up to a further $258 million for water infrastructure. This is good news for agriculture, good news for resources and good news for communities in general, particularly regional communities. Eight major construction projects have been completed since the establishment of the National Water Grid Authority less than two years ago. The government's ongoing investment brings the total number of projects in the pipeline—pardon the pun—to 30. The new $258 million commitment includes $160 million over the next two years for smaller-scale projects. Each project, large or small, means our regional areas are better serviced, more liveable and economically stronger. When regional Australia is strong, so too is Australia.

Regional areas have been through it all in the past year and a half—drought, fires, floods, risks from the global pandemic and, now, even a mouse plague. But regional Australians are tough. They are resilient. Our people and industries have persevered in the face of great adversity—they always do—and I thank them on behalf of a grateful nation for what they have done during this global pandemic.

With strong support from the government's regional agenda, the regions are bouncing back. In fact, they're leading the way—they're leading the economic recovery through COVID. In 2020 a net 43,000 Australians moved out of the cities and into the regional Australian lifestyle. Regional Australia Institute research has found no fewer than 67½ thousand regional jobs—good, well-paying jobs—are available right now. Last year's budget was the strongest budget regional Australia has ever seen, and the 11 May budget delivered by the Treasurer built on that success and infrastructure for our regions.

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

I think this might be the first time we've had an Acting Prime Minister doing consideration in detail, and I congratulate the Deputy Prime Minister on his elevation to high office. We never quite know what we're going to get when you're in the role—yesterday it was mice—so we'll see what we get today.

Thank you very much for the outline of the budget. I've got a few questions that I'd like to ask you. The first is a pretty simple one. Maths wasn't my strong point but I didn't do too badly at it at school. When you announced—I think it was in MYEFO, or it might have been in the last budget—that there was an additional $10 billion going into your $100 billion infrastructure program, you started talking about the infrastructure program being $110 billion. So that money got added in and we accepted that; you've now got a $110 billion infrastructure program. We may quibble about what you count as new money and all those things, but that's fine. But just before the budget you did a whole series of splashes on the Monday, and I think there was an extra $15 billion. So how come the infrastructure budget is now not $125 billion? You're not saying that, because the reality is you're the first infrastructure minister in a while to actually have a cut to your budget. The reality of the budget papers is that you've had a cut to your budget, which is pretty embarrassing for an infrastructure minister and Acting Prime Minister. It's there in the budget papers: $3.3 billion over the next four years has been taken out of your portfolio for infrastructure. You've made this big claim that you've got this extra $15 billion of new money coming in. Somehow or other there's this magic pudding that's suddenly shrinking, because it's not $125 billion, as you'd expect if you're adding more money to the program, but still $110 billion—and it's actually less than that. We now understand that it is in fact a rolling program, which basically means there are things coming in and things coming out. So this whole notion of $110 billion is a myth.

Let me go to the budget, particularly in terms of the cut. I know the Acting Prime Minister will say, 'There's no cut here.' That's what happens whenever there are cuts in the budget; I've seen it happen time and time again when I had Health for the last six years. But on page 84 of Budget Paper No. 1 it says:

the government's main bucket for infrastructure—

which are expected to decrease by $188.7 million in 2020-21 ($3.3 billion over the four years to 2023-24), largely reflecting a re-profile of program funding to align with the delivery of project milestones.

I have been a cabinet minister. I have presided over parts of budgets being developed and I know exactly what that means. It means you are the first infrastructure minister in over a decade to actually have a cut to your budget. You should be very proud of that! In simple language, this means the government is failing to deliver on its promises in terms of infrastructure over the next four years. Acting Prime Minister, how have you let that happen? You call it a rolling pipeline because the reality is that these promises kept rolling off the end into the never-never. They are cuts, pure and simple.

We know there is an underspend on infrastructure, year on year. Each and every year it's an average of $1.2 billion, but last year it was $1.7 billion. In a year when hundreds of thousands of Australians have lost their jobs, frankly, you reached new heights in being unable to actually deliver. We wait to see how much the underspend will be in the 2020-21 financial year, and it would be terrific if the Acting Prime Minister could give us a hint as to what that might be.

Mr McCormack interjecting—

I have excellent hearing too, by the way. Why is it that the government continuously breaks its promises when it comes to infrastructure spending?

Why is it that you make the same big promises time and time again, always looking for the headline, but actually fail to deliver? Most of the projects that you have delivered are projects that Labor announced in our time in office. Go up there, cut the ribbon—we know how that works. Why is it that you've presided over a cut to your budget, and why are you so proud of that?

Pat Conaghan (Cowper, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm very pleased to rise to speak on the Appropriation Bill (No.1) 2021-2022. It's nice to have the Acting Prime Minister, Mr McCormack, come here in support of me today. Thank you very much, Acting Prime Minister!

That has not gone unnoticed! We're finally coming back to some normality after the drought and the fires and the floods and the pandemic and then more floods. These things have been devastating for many in my community.

One of the great funding programs of this government has been the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program, which, through phases 1, 2 and 3, has provided an additional $27 million of road and community infrastructure projects in my electorate of Cowper. This coalition government is providing an additional $1 billion over two years from 2021-22 to extend the LRCI program to support all local councils to maintain and deliver social infrastructure, improve road safety and bolster the resilience of Australian local road networks. The investment increases the total funding under the LRCI to $2.5 billion.

An honourable member interjecting—

It's a big number, but it makes such a difference to our local communities, particularly in my electorate. I have five councils and they've all received decent funding under this program. Bellingen has received $2.52 million, Coffs Harbour City $7.1 million, Kempsey $5 million, Nambucca Valley $3.3 million and Port Macquarie an additional $8.9 million. These projects are making a real difference in our communities. In some instances, they're changing or saving lives.

I will give just a few examples from across the electorate. Nambucca, a great town, received $700,000 to construct major improvements in towns and public spaces right across the valley. They're not just beautifying the valley but providing better and safer access to pedestrians and mobility scooters. In my electorate nearly 30 per cent of people are over the age of 65. Proper access for mobility scooters and proper access on pedestrian walkways is so important to the older generation. Kempsey received $1.16 million to construct new bicycle paths and walkways, delivering improvements through the Macleay Valley and, importantly, supporting 56 local jobs during the construction. That's real recovery from the COVID pandemic. Port Macquarie, through the first round, received $1.8 million for seven projects which supported 31 jobs during rollout.

Of course, we can't forget the big-ticket items. This government has committed to funding 80 per cent of the Coffs Harbour bypass to the tune of $1.46 billion. It is a 12-kilometre stretch of the highway which will create 10,000 jobs during the life of its construction and, importantly, will every day take 12,000 cars off the road going through Coffs Harbour. That will allow the city centre to flow and to flourish into the future.

Speaking of big-ticket items, at the end of 2020 we saw the opening of the final section of the Pacific Highway between Woolgoolga and Ballina, a 15-kilometre section between Devils Pulpit and Woodburn. When I was growing up in Kempsey, it was a good nine-hour trip up to Brisbane or down to Sydney—it's halfway between the two. You'd get in the back of the Valiant with the seven kids and off you'd choof.

An honourable member interjecting—

There were no seatbelts! Now it's an easy 4½-hour drive either way. That's true investment, real investment, but it's also saving lives.

Very briefly, in my last 20 seconds, I will say that when the government invests in the local community it also encourages private enterprise to invest in the local community. The announcement yesterday by Russell Crowe and Peter Montgomery to spend over $400 million in our local economy for a new film studio was fantastic news, and it's all because of the government's investment.

Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs and Defence Personnel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I was elected in 2007 I was in business for 20 years. I never had any problems with my fellow shareholders and directors in the business investing in social or human capital or physical capital that made a difference in terms of our profitability and growth and that left a legacy. I can't say the same about this government, Acting Prime Minister. You are spending $100 billion on the government credit card, racking up a trillion dollars in debt but leaving no real physical legacy, and, as the shadow minister said, there are $3.3 billion in cuts to infrastructure in the budget—it is actually listed in the budget.

My home state of Queensland was promised $1.6 billion in new projects, but only 50 per cent of that is on this side of the forward estimates. Only $18.1 million of new spending in the budget is due in this first year—$18.1 million. That's about 18 kilometres of road. That's just extraordinary. TheCourier Mail records that Queensland has the lowest amount per capita, at $307 per person, compared to $488 in Western Australia, $448 in Victoria and $367 in New South Wales. How does the Acting Prime Minister defend this paltry per capita volume of spending in the fastest-growing and most decentralised state in the country? How can you justify that, Acting Prime Minister? How is it that Queensland receives less funding per capita for infrastructure than any other state and territory? The government claimed they would provide $1.6 billion of new money for Queensland infrastructure projects. It's simply $18 million this year. Why is more than half of that money not actually listed across the forward estimates? It's off in the never-never. It's designed to get a headline before the budget but is not good enough to deliver on needs.

The mayor of Ipswich brought you, Acting Prime Minister, and Senator Paul Scarr to Ipswich and to Springfield to talk about the Ipswich to Springfield business case, the rail link that's necessary. Ipswich is going to grow from about 230,000 people to about 550,000 in the next 20 or 30 years. Acting Prime Minister, I mentioned this to you twice, showing bipartisan support. I expected $1 million in the budget. Why is there not $1 million in the budget for the business case in this really fast-growing area? It is the fastest-growing area in South-East Queensland. One in seven people in the country live in South-East Queensland, contributing $1 in $6 to our national growth, our national expenditure. It is simply not good enough. I ask you to think about that again, Acting Prime Minister, and to make a commitment to Ipswich.

Why is there no money in the budget for the last section of the Ipswich Motorway from the Oxley roundabout to the Centenary interchange? At the last federal election we said that, if we won the election, we would commit $500 million to kickstart that project. The coalition were opposed to the Ipswich Motorway upgrade until they had a road to Damascus conversion experience an election ago. Then, to the credit of the government—I will give the government credit and acknowledge this—they worked with the Queensland government on the Oxley roundabout to Suscatand Street section, and that has made a big difference in the lives of people in South-East Queensland, from Brisbane, Ipswich and beyond. That last section absolutely needs to get done, and there is no money in the budget. I call on you, Acting Prime Minister, to do the right thing. When are you going to do it?

In addition to that, there is the Cunningham Highway. We've spent, since John Howard's days as Prime Minister, over $1 billion on the RAAF Base Amberley. Whoever is the base commander at the time and the CDF always talk about the fact that, no matter who's in government, we need to fix the road outside the RAAF Base Amberley. We need to do it, but there's no money for it in the budget. You know the government in Queensland is going to lodge a business case. They've said that they're going to lodge a business case. Why is there no money in the budget in relation to that? What about the Mount Crosby Road interchange? There's a bit of money for a scoping study. Why aren't you showing a proactive approach and working with the Queensland government to fix this most notorious section of road in Ipswich? It clogs up the Mount Crosby Road interchange all the way back to the Dinmore overpass. Why aren't you working with the Queensland government in a more proactive way to get that done? Why is there no money in the budget beyond a scoping study, $4 million? That's simply not good enough, Acting Prime Minister. The fastest-growing region in South-East Queensland in the fastest-growing part of the country, and there's no money, almost none.

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker, Minister for Regional Health, Regional Communications and Local Government) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There's one thing I enjoy about the job that we have, and that is the irony in some of the contributions that we hear. The member for Blair and I turned up here on the same day some while ago now. I did enjoy his contribution immensely because it was dripping with irony. It followed the contribution from the member for Cowper, who was talking about the completion for the first time of the Pacific Highway and the Coffs Harbour tunnel. I was in the member's electorate recently as I drove through there last Sunday. I actually stopped in his electorate and brought about $400 worth of mouse bait, but that's another story. Scooting along the Ipswich motorway, I nearly missed his electorate, the roads that have been funded were that good—you'll recognise the last bit of work funded by the federal government. I then scooted up the Toowoomba Bypass, the Toowoomba Second Range Crossing, which was designed and funded by our government. But I digress.

I'd like to talk about the support and role of local government and the relationship we have with local government. Just out of interest, through the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program, the greater Brisbane area received $75 million, Ipswich itself received $14 million, Scenic Rim received $5 million and the Somerset council received $4 million. I understand they're not all in your electorate, but parts of them are. There's been considerable investment by this government right across Australia. I would really like to give a shout-out to the 537 councils across Australia because of the relationship that we've had, particularly during the pandemic. We understand that local governments, with their connection into the local communities, were the most effective way to get our stimulus measures into individual communities because they understood the priorities. They had the workforce and, in some cases, a workforce that was underresourced because of the impacts early on of COVID. We saw right across the country great projects delivered by councils. But in some cases, even in the early stages of the pandemic, councils were reassigning staff that may have been underutilised to help out community organisations. We had council staff across the country delivering Meals On Wheels and helping out some of those more vulnerable groups. I need to make the point that, under this government, every year councils have received more funding from this government. Last year the FA grants—

Ms Catherine King interjecting—

I'm glad you interjected, member for Ballarat. Last year funding for the FA grants increased by $50 million. We added another $2.5 billion through the LRCI program and are bringing forward, to help councils with expenditure through the FA grants, the additional funding through the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program and obviously the Roads to Recovery Program. This government has really supported councils but also appreciated the role that they have played. The member for Cowper was talking about some of the great projects in his area that were delivered by the council and funded by this government. They provided short-term stimulus in employment but also long-term benefits. Last week I was in Bourke, in my electorate. It mightn't seem much, but they have received several million dollars through the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure program. One of those projects was a modern public amenities block and an upgraded park. What we've seen with COVID is that, right across the regions, tourism is coming back to those areas. And local councils, with the assistance of this government, have stepped up and are improving the facilities and services that encourage people not only to go there in the first place but to maybe stay there for an extra period of time. As the minister for local government, I'm very proud of the relationship we have with councils. I'm very proud of the councils themselves and I'm very pleased that this government has been able to provide more support for local government than any other government in previous times.

Patrick Gorman (Perth, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Western Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Despite living in times of great uncertainty, we do know some things for certain. What we know for certain is that this government will always overpromise and underdeliver when it comes to its infrastructure commitments. I've got questions on behalf of my community for the Acting Prime Minister and his assistant ministers about what is happening with what the government is promising in Western Australia versus what it's actually delivering.

One of the great examples where the photo op and the flyer sound great but the government doesn't actually deliver is the Reid Highway and Erindale Road intersection. The government have committed $2 million for a business case, but then they have government members who don't tell the full story. I like the member for Stirling—he is a good human—but I do have to say that, when he sends out a flyer to his community saying something is underway and construction has started, it means either that there's a falsehood being passed on to the people in Western Australia or that the Acting Prime Minister has not actually told us the full story of where they are allocating government funds. I would have thought that in the budget we would get a clearer picture, but I went to look for the funding for the construction to start soon and nowhere in that budget did I find it. So one of my questions—I have many—to the Acting Prime Minister is: is that money in the budget or is the very good member for Stirling wrong? Have you let him down? Have you let the people of Western Australia down? I would love some clarity on that.

This wasn't what I intended to come in and speak on as we consider the budget in detail, but also I would like to seek an apology from the Acting Prime Minister to people who live in the CBD of Perth for suggesting that we should send a devastating mouse plague to the CBDs, to inner-city apartments where I have a lot of pensioners and older Australians retiring in my electorate. We are very fortunate that there is a large amount of space between where this plague is affecting communities and my electorate, but I do think we need to get an apology. I would ask that you take the opportunity when you're speaking on this to apologise for those remarks. I don't believe it was appropriate language, and I really am concerned.

One of the real concerns I have is: what happens when it comes to City Deals? It's been five years since the city deals were promised. Five years in the government's language is two Prime Ministers worth of time. The Perth City Deal was promised in 2017 under then Prime Minister Turnbull. We had a memorandum of understanding signed in April 2018. On the government's own figures, the Perth City Deal and the projects within it will not be completed until 2030, almost 10 years away. There was a great press release saying that there were going to be 10,000 jobs. I would like to ask: how many of those 10,000 jobs from the city deal, which took you four years to put together, have actually been delivered in Western Australia? If you put out a press release saying there are 10,000 jobs, I think you need to be honest about when those jobs are being delivered. If I look at the glossy brochure that the government put out about the Perth City Deal, again, there are lots of promises. But I want to know: how many jobs on the ECU campus that has been promised for the CBD have currently been delivered, and can the government confirm that the completion date is still 2024?

Will this project and will WAAPA be in the Perth CBD by 2024, as promised in the government's own papers? If not, what has happened with the Perth City Deal? Will Murdoch University and Curtin University both be operating in the Perth CBD by 2023? We've got businesses in the Perth CBD who are crying out for more people to visit the CBD to boost their revenues and to boost their profitability, and they are relying on this to be delivered on time.

I also want to know what is actually happening with the WACA redevelopment. We've seen a lot of controversy around the swimming pool that was promised to people in East Perth in my electorate. The reality is that, even after four years of negotiations on this city deal, the document that was provided by the government says 'City of Perth: TBC'. Six months on, is the city deal still TBC for the people in East Perth who are relying on getting those facilities in their community, and when will the government sort out the finalisation of these negotiations? Finally, can you outline how many jobs are going to be created from the Perth Cultural Centre rejuvenation and the Perth Concert Hall— (Time expired)

Tony Pasin (Barker, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question to the Acting Prime Minister is a relatively simple one. After I put it, I want to set some context around it. Acting Prime Minister, are you aware of the incredibly positive impact that the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program is having in my electorate of Barker and the nation more broadly? That's the question.

Mr Gosling interjecting—

Let me set the context for that question. Those opposite might laugh, of course, but it might have escaped their attention—particularly, perhaps, the member for Solomon, who's throwing scorn at the moment—that we're dealing with a one-in-100-year pandemic. There's been a recession induced by that pandemic. But, before that, the member for Solomon needs to know that, in my electorate, we were gripped by drought—two years, two seasons, complete failure. Do you know what happens when farmers go and get $1 million worth of seed and other inputs and pour them into the ground and it doesn't rain? They get a little concerned about that. When they have to do it twice, they get very concerned about it.

All of that was happening as the global pandemic broke. I was at home in lockdown, in South Australia, thankfully. We've avoided most of the extended lockdowns. I was thinking back then that, in 12 months, we would have an unemployment rate 12 to 15 per cent. I was petrified. I've lived through the best of times in Australia—26 years of unbridled economic growth. I was worried that my generation and those younger than me wouldn't understand what kind of hardship was coming, nor would they understand how to deal with it.

Fast forward to now. Those opposite might think that there has been some miracle not connected to the decisions in this place—not that the outcome that we've achieved, so spectacular as it is, is all about decisions made in this place; it's a cooperation between every Australian, not just the people who get the great privilege of being in this building but the 24 million Australians who've lent their shoulder to the wheel. But the reality is that that miracle didn't arrive in and of itself.

We now have more people in employment than we had prior to the pandemic. We have unemployment with a 'five' in front of it, and it's projected to go lower still. Those spectacular outcomes, not just in my electorate but across the nation, have occurred because we lent in when we needed to. We were in the financial position to be able to make those decisions—our fiscal position was strong, as you know, Acting Prime Minister—but we were able to lean in, and we leaned in with lots of programs.

Of course, we had the drought support programs in my electorate, but if I'm talking specifically about the pandemic induced recession then I think one of the greatest measures was the partnership with local governments through the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program. I spent eight years on a local council, and I could have only dreamt of this kind of partnership. In my time, I think we attracted a grant of $1 million over eight years. Well, local councils in my electorate, over the course of three phases of this program, Acting Prime Minister, have received—wait for it—$53.8 million; 18 councils. But that's not the end of it. They've taken this funding and they've leveraged it with their own to put shovels in the ground to help employ Australians, leaving behind them, in the wake of that work, social capital.

That social capital runs to the priorities that councils themselves determined. Those priorities are a product of what their communities want. I know, as I know you know, Acting Prime Minister, that local councils, councillors and mayors are closest to their community. They know what priorities their community wants. They get to spend more time in their community than I get to spend in their community. I'm quite envious. I get dragged away to Canberra 20 weeks of the year; they don't. It's projects like the Pinnaroo aerodrome; the riverfront at Sturt Reserve; LED lighting across the city of Mount Gambier; a skate bowl and recreation park for Naracoorte; the Renmark town wharf renewal; and the Barossa United Football Club, a million-dollar playing surface. This is social capital. I repeat: Acting Prime Minister, are you aware of the positive impacts the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program is having in my electorate as well as the nation more broadly?

Jason Clare (Blaxland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Regional Services, Territories and Local Government) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the Acting Prime Minister for being here as part of this process today. This is a process which is not always taken seriously, so your attendance here today is much appreciated. I want to talk about the big shift that we've seen in last 12 months of people from cities to regions. I know the Acting Prime Minister shares this view. People on both sides of the parliament have been working hard for years, for decades, to encourage more Australians to move from cities to regions. We've had some limited success in that regard over the years, but last year that happened big time. I think the statistics show that, in net terms, the number of people who moved from cities to regions last year was more than double what it was the year before. We understand the reason for that. COVID plays a big part—people wanting to move away from the cities to be safer—but also people being able to move to the regions because of the ability to work online.

It's great news to have more people moving to the regions, but one of the side effects of that we've seen is a massive increase in house prices in the regions. We've seen that right across the country. Comparatively, the jump in house prices in regional Australia has been double what it is in our major capital cities. Here are a couple of figures to demonstrate that point. In the last 12 months, house prices in Sydney have jumped by about 11 per cent; in regional New South Wales it's about 18.6, so almost double. In Victoria it's an even bigger jump. House prices have jumped in Melbourne by five per cent, but in regional Victoria by 13 per cent. It has almost tripled in that circumstance. In Brisbane, house prices have jumped by 10 per cent, but in regional Queensland they have jumped by 14.6 per cent.

If you own a home in regional Australia, that's great news, but if you're trying to get into that market it's hard, particularly for young families living in regional Australia. They often think it's easier to live there, that it's easier to own a home there than in the big cities, but it's now getting comparatively harder. It's also getting harder to rent. I'm sure the Acting Prime Minister will know this, but in some parts of regional Australia it's now even hard to find a place to rent. The rental vacancy rates in some parts of regional Australia are almost zero. On the Fraser Coast in Queensland it's 0.2 per cent; Southern Downs is 2.3; Bundaberg is 0.5, Gympie is 0.4; South Coast of New South Wales is 0.7; Northern Rivers is 0.5; and Burnie in Tasmania is now 0.2. The list goes on and on. It's a trend. We understand why it's happening. The real question is what can we do about it.

I was in Coffs Harbour recently talking to the mayor there, Denise Knight. She told me the story of a place that was up for rent and there were 80 people lined up to go and look at the place. The person who won the lease had to pay the rent 12 months in advance, and took out a personal loan to do it. That's the circumstance that we're in at the moment. When you've got a circumstance where there's not much to rent and rents are going up, it increases the amount of homelessness. Mayors are now starting to tell me they're starting to see street homelessness in parts of the country they have never seen it in before.

Here's another story. In Byron Bay, a place where property is very expensive—the average price of a home in Byron Bay is higher than the average price in Sydney—there is no domestic violence refuge. The local police commander reckons that there are 400 women living in Byron Bay at the moment who are sleeping in cars. Here's another one. Today's Cairns Post has a story about a young family—a dad, a mum, a young daughter and a dog—who were standing on the side of the road and were photographed with a sign that said, 'Wanted—two-bed rental, small family and a dog' and their mobile number. Acting Prime Minister, it's a story in the Cairns Postabout a family you think might be hitchhikers looking for a lift, but they're just trying to get a place to live in, to rent. There's a genuine housing crisis in regional Australia, and there's a lot of work that needs to be done to fix it. I think we should all agree it's going to involve the cooperation and effort of federal government, state government and local government all working together. In today's Sydney Morning Herald there's a story about the New South Wales government setting up a regional housing task force. In the same story Linda Scott, the head of the Australian Local Government Association, calls for investment in the construction of more affordable and social housing in regional Australia. There was a lot of money in the budget for a lot of things, but there was no additional funding for social and accordable housing.

We committed, in the budget reply, to a $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund, which over five years would build 30,000 affordable and social homes across the country, where they're needed, and in particular in regional Australia. We know this is a problem. It's not good enough to say it's the states' job. They're doing something, but we need the federal government to do more. Will you invest more in social and affordable housing for regional Australia?

Andrew Gee (Calare, National Party, Minister for Decentralisation and Regional Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This budget places regional Australia at the heart of our national recovery, and rightly so when one considers that it has been regional Australia—our farmers, our food producers, our food processors, our miners, our regional small businesses—that have certainly done the heavy lifting during COVID-19. Our agriculture sector alone has gone from contributing $60 billion to our economy to contributing $66 billion in the past 12 months, and we've just posted a record in rural exports, as the member for Flynn knows. Strengthening our economy, creating jobs, landmark infrastructure investments, guaranteeing essential services, building our capability as a nation are the hallmarks of this budget. We want to ensure that government, industry, research and education—all of those sectors—have a shared vision to drive the success of our regions and future economic prosperity. The Australian government is overseeing a historic amount of investment in the regions, in recognition of their strategic importance to our nation and to reflect the fact that increasing numbers of Australians are choosing to make a new life and home in regional Australia because of the unparalleled lifestyle opportunities. We've heard from the Deputy Prime Minister about the historic spend in regional infrastructure across all aspects of regional life, whether it be transport infrastructure, health and digital connectivity or supporting local business leaders.

One of the facets of this pandemic has been the great awakening by people in the cities about what lies over the Great Dividing Range, or the 'sandstone curtain', as we like to call it in the central west of New South Wales. In 1851, when gold was discovered at Ophir, just outside Orange, there was a huge emptying of Sydney as its people crossed the mountains. Ships were abandoned in Sydney Harbour and there was one long line of humanity crossing the mountains to the goldfields. Last year a net 43,000 people moved to the regions from the cities. The year before the number was 19,000, so it has more than doubled. We are seeing a greater migration today from the cities to the country than we did back in the days of the gold rush. So earlier this week, for example, the deputy PM and I inspected the site for the $2.03 billion boost to the Great Western Highway. This is a huge project for our area, and it is a project very close to the hearts of the people of the central west. We know how congested that road is getting. Normally, the trip from Sydney to Orange takes about 3½ hours. Over Easter it took my two daughters nine hours-plus to get home, and everyone in our area has a horror story like that.

That's why it's so important to get projects like this up and running and moving. There'll be shovels ready and sods turned next year because projects like this bridge that great divide between the city and the country, reducing travel times and making the roads safer. Also, by forming the key links between city and country, we help to built capacity in regional Australia—in this case, central western New South Wales—and we set our regions up for jobs, we set them up for growth and we set them up for prosperity. This is on top of the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program, which has seen millions and millions of dollars allocated for upgrades. In my electorate, it is more than $8 million and, in the current financial year, $38 million over the forward estimates. These projects are critical to our future and our prosperity, and they help support the liveability in our regions.

As part of the budget, we're also investing $50 million, through round 6 of the Building Better Regions Fund, to build community, workplace and innovation hubs across regional Australia. This has been very warmly received across the regions. These hubs will deliver jobs and significantly help to boost local investment and bring a range of benefits to small businesses, remote workers, community organisations and travelling professionals alike. Obviously, we'll also be supporting the relocation of public sector jobs to our regions through our cross-agency task force, which was also delivered through this budget. This budget delivers for regional Australia, and long may it continue.

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

There are just a couple of comments I want to make about some of the contributions of those opposite. I think, in particular, the issue that my colleague mentioned about regional housing is a really gaping hole. It's an absolute gaping hole in this budget, and I think that every single one of us who represents a regional community, of which there are many in this House, knows exactly what is happening with regional housing at the moment. The fact that the government has spent $100 billion, has a trillion dollars worth of debt and has been unable to solve—in fact, its own policies have exacerbated—the problem of regional housing across this community is actually something the government should be ashamed of.

In terms of local government, we, of course, have always welcomed the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program, because it's based on a program that we had during the global financial crisis, the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program. Some of the members who are here are new and may realise that millions of dollars went to local councils through that program at the time, and we're very pleased that the government has modelled its program on that. But what you also did was freeze financial assistance grants. You ripped a billion dollars out of local governments, and that has had a cumulative effect on them. That's one of the problems that you have at local government level at the moment. Communities—in particular, regional communities—have shrinking rates bases, or rates bases that are under pressure for a variety of reasons, and you froze the financial assistance grants, and that has been a cumulative problem for local government. Whilst they welcome what you've put back in, they're also really devastated by what you ripped out.

I want to say one thing about what we see in this budget with the $3.3 billion worth of cuts: where is the legacy? Where is the legacy of this government when it comes to infrastructure? Where are the state-by-state icons—the cross river rails, the metronets, the regional rails or suburban rail loops? Where is that legacy? There isn't one. There is $100 billion and a trillion dollars in debt, and you have to ask yourself: after eight long years of this government, what has been its point? What's the point of them?

If you want to look at an absolute example of where this government has overpromised and then underdelivered, you only have to look at the Urban Congestion Fund and, in particular, the commuter car parks. This Urban Congestion Fund was announced in 2018. That's a while ago now. It was in the 2018 budget. It was $4.8 billion, part of the government's so-called $110 billion or $103 billion program—whatever it is now; I don't know what it is. This fund of $4.8 billion is to support upgrades to the urban road networks et cetera.

How do you characterise the success of this program? In budget estimates last month, $4.8 billion was announced—it was topped up a bit but was announced in 2018—and they've spent $340 million of it. With all the congestion in Australian cities, how is it that the government has only managed to get $340 million out the door? Initially the government intended to spend $1.2 billion through this fund next year, but that's now been revised down by almost a billion dollars, to $775 million. Why is that? Why has that occurred? An ANAO report is about to be released—we're awaiting that—into the commuter car parks. Just weeks before its release, we've seen the latest development in this rolling fiasco of a program. We saw announcements that commuters at Brighton Beach, Balaclava, Mitcham, Kananook and Seaford will basically be left circling the block looking for a car park in order to get to work. In estimates, departmental officials couldn't guarantee that there would be other car parks. Acting Prime Minister, we'd like to know: What are the other car parks? What are the other Urban Congestion Fund projects that you're planning to cancel? This fund has been an absolute failure, frankly. Minister Fletcher was brought in to clean up the mess of this particular program, which means there will be further cuts to it.

I also want to mention briefly that just last week I was in Newcastle checking out the site of the M1 extension to Raymond Terrace. The Commonwealth has announced $1.6 billion of funding for this project, but work is not forecast to begin for another two years. The $1.6 billion is well beyond the forward estimates. Commuters need that road fixed now. I'd like to ask you, Acting Prime Minister: when are you going to get on with the M1 extension to Raymond Terrace?

Ken O'Dowd (Flynn, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I stand today to speak on the LRCI funding in my electorate of Flynn, which over the years has been quite humungous. We have looked at many projects, and jobs are being done. There's still some work outstanding. I can cite, for instance, the John Peterson Bridge outside Mundubbera on the Durong Road. It's been an atrocious bridge, with a left-hand S-bend over the Boyne River. We're soon to get that started. But, of course, we rely on the TMR, the Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads, to actually organise it and get the job done. They have scoped the bridge, they have costed the bridge, and now all we need is for them to start that particular project.

There are eight councils in my electorate, including Central Highlands Regional Council in Emerald, the Banana Shire Council, parts of the Rockhampton shire, parts of the Bundaberg shire, North Burnett, South Burnett and the Aboriginal town of Woorabinda. They are supported through financial assistance grants, FAGs, which can range from anywhere between $6 million and $12 million a year; our Roads to Recovery Program; and our Bridges Renewal Program. That's a great help to these small councils, who don't have the rate base to support their roads. A lot of the roads in those council areas are still dirt roads. A lot of roads go across black soil. It's good farming country. Whether they are sealed roads or dirt roads, they do need maintenance on a regular basis. That's what's happening between Bauhinia Downs and Moura at the moment. We're flattening out the roads and redoing the edges. There are ongoing projects right across Flynn.

The famous worst road in Australia goes from Springsure to Tambo. We have put aside $40 million to get that 250 kilometres of road sealed. The $40 million will go a long way to adding to the 50 kilometres that is already sealed. It will be an ongoing project. It will link the west to Central Queensland and into the port of Gladstone. You can drive any sort of truck, a B-double or a road train, from Clermont to the Townsville port, but you cannot drive a B-double from Emerald to Gladstone port, which is one of the biggest ports in Australia. But we're working on that too. That will be fixed with the Springsure to Tambo road and the other roads along the Capricorn Highway.

We've done a lot of work. There's work underway now at Three Moon Creek, which is between Eidsvold and Mundubbera. Deep Creek between Gayndah and Mundubbera has just been completed. There's the Valentine Creek Bridge west of Gracemere. The last wooden bridge on the Capricorn Highway was replaced. The Capricorn Highway goes from Rockhampton right through to Longreach. That was the last wooden bridge to be replaced.

Of course there are other projects. When I first became a member of this House there was a single-lane road between Gracemere, which is a town of about 8,000 people just outside of Rockhampton, and Rockhampton. That is now a four-lane highway. I can tell you that the people of Gracemere and anyone who uses the Capricorn Highway are very pleased with the project. We've got plans to do a ring-road around Rockhampton, as is the case with towns up the coast along the Bruce Highway. They bypass towns like Gympie. The Rockhampton ring-road will take in some parts of Flynn around Alton Downs and those areas.

It's all happening, but it does cost a lot of money. The federal government are prepared to spend that money because they know that, if the regions are doing well, we need these roads for our beef industry and our agriculture industry. As a previous speaker just said, our agriculture industry has grown even in these tough drought times—from $60 billion to $68 billion. (Time expired)

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

I want to go to some state-by-state specific projects, but before I do that I want to talk a little bit about airports and in particular one airport I know the Acting Prime Minister will know well—Wagga Wagga Airport. I flew in there about a month ago. It's a pretty flash looking airport.

Mr McCormack interjecting—

We could have. You weren't in town at the time, Acting Prime Minister. It's a pretty flash looking airport. I note the local member says that he's not in favour of this airport being handed over to the council. The council is experiencing significant problems. He has made the claim that the RAAF base would disappear from Wagga if the council has the airport. We know that many local councils had airports in their areas handed over to them over 30 years ago at no cost. The Wagga council is pretty keen for that to occur. I must admit that I'm at a bit of a loss as to why the Acting Prime Minister doesn't think this is a good idea. We have seen it happen in other areas.

I recognise very much the contribution to the Newcastle Airport and congratulate as well the member for Paterson for her great advocacy in making sure that the Acting Prime Minister was aware of that and ensured that that project got funded. I see that great partnership over Newcastle Airport between two councils that works very successfully. I ask the Acting Prime Minister why he thinks that's not possible for the Wagga Wagga Airport.

In terms of the state-by-state breakdown, there's so-called new money in this budget. I say 'so-called new money' because we know that there was a $3.3 billion cut in the heart of the budget to infrastructure funding. You are the first infrastructure minister in over a decade to have a cut to his infrastructure budget. For example, the government claim to be spending new money in the Northern Territory, but 99 per cent of the money promised the day before the budget is actually not in the budget at all. It's off on the never-never. It's quite an achievement—only one per cent of that new money is to be spent in the Northern Territory over the next four years.

For Victoria, 87 per cent of its promised new money isn't in the budget. The $2 billion commitment for the new intermodal freight hub in Melbourne's north or west is off budget. We don't know the location yet. I know there's talk between Truganina and Beveridge. We also don't know how it's going to be funded through the budget. Is it a loan? Is it an equity investment? Is it a grant? What is that money going to be? Can the Acting Prime Minister answer that please?

In New South Wales, well over half of the newly announced funding isn't in the budget. The biggest ticket item for New South Wales, as we've heard, is the $2 billion for the Great Western Highway upgrade, which is off on the never-never. I'm sure local members will be disappointed to hear that it won't be finished until 2028 at the earliest, on the current projections of the government's funding. Why is it that you didn't contribute a single cent to new public transport projects in New South Wales despite them being of the highest priority for the New South Wales government? Is it because it's the same old tired government that left Queensland to go it alone on Cross River Rail?

In South Australia over a third of the money promised isn't in the budget. The biggest promise, the North-South Corridor, is nothing more than a reheated announcement. I think it's been announced eight times now. It had already been announced before, and even the South Australian government has admitted what the Deputy Prime Minister won't admit: that this is a renouncement. It's got several headlines out of it, but we want to know when work will actually begin on this project that has been talked about forever and ever and ever.

When it comes to Tasmania I think the member for Lyons summed it up best, saying the announcements on the Midland Highway have been 'reheated more times than a dodgy takeaway'. Apparently the $64 million for the Burnie shiploader is fully funded. But, in reality, only $44 million is actually allocated to this project; it's $20 million short. We'd be keen to know where that new money is coming from.

When we were last in government, we actually delivered on infrastructure, whether it was Tiger Brennan Drive or Arnhem Highway in the Northern Territory; $7.9 billion for the Pacific Highway; building the Hunter Expressway; doubling the federal infrastructure spend per Victorian; investing in the Regional Rail Link; upgrading the M80; duplicating long parts of the Princes Highway, east and west; or, in South Australia, building the Northern Expressway. Labor has a really strong legacy of delivering on infrastructure. This government just cuts it.

Anne Webster (Mallee, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Today I rise to speak on some of the fantastic infrastructure projects that the Morrison-McCormack government are delivering in my electorate of Mallee. Our government understands that world-class infrastructure is vital to the strength and future prosperity of regional Australia. We believe that our regional communities deserve the best roads, the best community infrastructure and the best telecommunications possible. The 2021 budget is building on our government's track record of delivering infrastructure projects right across the country. This year's budget is delivering another $1 billion to the highly successful Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program, taking this program to $2.5 billion—money that is investing and valuing our local regional communities.

The LRCI Program was a lifeline to Mallee councils during the year of COVID, when economic stimulus was desperately needed. Councils in Mallee have now received almost $73 million in the last year. Mallee councils have already put their money to good use and have delivered some outstanding projects across the communities. Swan Hill council has built new women's change rooms at the netball courts in Robinvale, where there were none, making weekend sport better and certainly more enjoyable for everyone in the community. Horsham council have used some of their money to upgrade community halls. The hall in Mitre has received an upgrade to their kitchen facilities. Taylors Lakes Hall, which is a focal point of the small community of St Helens Plains, has been fitted with a new roof to improve safety. Mildura council has spent another $2 million in cleaning up vital roads in the Millewa that were impacted by sand drift, allowing farmers and community members to travel safely. These are just some of the great projects that have been delivered thanks to this government's LRCI Program, with many, many more on the way in Mallee.

But the LRCI Program is not the only highly successful infrastructure program that our government is delivering—far from it. There is also the hugely popular Building Better Regions Fund. The 2021 budget has committed a further $250 million for a sixth round of the fund, which is $50 million more than the previous rounds. In May, it was my pleasure to take the Acting Prime Minister on a tour of Mallee, where he saw some fantastic projects that have been delivered by the BBRF. The Acting Prime Minister saw the massive roof that has been built over the Horsham Regional Livestock Exchange, a $3.7 million project that was delivered with $1.5 million from the BBRF. He also came to Mildura and toured the Mildura South Regional Sporting Precinct, which received $17.5 million from the BBRF. This transformational sports precinct is truly a world-class project. In fact, the Acting Prime Minister said that it was one of the best sporting complexes he has seen in the entire country. This precinct will attract events and athletes from all over Australia, and will be a community hub for the fast-growing city of Mildura.

It's clear that our government is committed to delivering outstanding infrastructure right across the country. We also have a key focus on safety, particularly for our road users. The Calder Highway is a vital corridor for all road users in Mallee. The 2021 budget has delivered an additional $15 million for the Calder Highway, bringing our total commitment to $75 million for this vital road corridor. Road users in northern Mallee are thrilled with the new overtaking lanes that have been completed between Mildura and Ouyen, increasing safety for travellers on this road and getting families home safer and sooner. We will see further safety upgrades up and down the highway, including at the Baileys Road intersection near Sea Lake.

Whether it is road safety upgrades or investment into much needed community infrastructure, our government is delivering infrastructure programs for regional Australians. These investments are also vitally important to our nation's recovery. Can the Acting Prime Minister please outline what further benefit is coming from the LRCI Program for regional Australia?

Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs and Defence Personnel) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Acting Prime Minister, I want to mention Inland Rail. This has the potential to be a very important nation-defining project. The last Labor government committed a considerable amount of money towards its design and construction. We were very supportive of it. We think it's got great potential. But we are very concerned that it has gone off the rails, if I can put it like that. This is a project that, much like the national debt, has seen blowout. You initially allocated $9.3 billion, and now it's $14.5 billion. I'd like to ask some questions in relation to it and how it impacts my local area.

One of the things I've got to say is that the consultation has been very poor. I've been at multiple meetings in my electorate in relation to this issue. Local farmers, local businesses and local constituents have raised concerns in relation to issues in terms of the direction, where the track will be laid, the fact that it will be very high, and the fact that some of these areas had been flooded quite significantly in floods in 2011 and 2013 across the Ipswich region. There has been a lot of comment, including by the Mayor of Ipswich, that this has a high impact but low benefit for our area. There is major concern about that.

One of the great things about our region is the Ivory's Rock conference centre, where thousands of people come for peace conferences, which contributes millions of dollars to the economy of Ipswich for the small businesses around Ipswich. People stay there. This has been a really important venue. We've got nothing like it in the West Moreton region. But this track will go 500 metres from the conference centre. You can hear the Ipswich Boonah Road from the auditorium at the back of the conference centre, so imagine the rail going that close. But when the Ivory's Rock consortium and group had been talking to your government and the ARTC in relation to it, and made submissions in relation to it, there was simply no offer or opportunity for noise attenuation. None at all. The camping grounds are right beside where the rail will go. I'm asking, Acting Prime Minister: what sort of contribution will be made to assist the Ivory's Rock conference centre, which is such a vital part of my electorate? How can you address the issue of consultation and support for local farmers across the Scenic Rim area, across the Lockyer Valley and across Ipswich in relation to this project? Can we get this project back to where it should be? I've got to say, I have never seen poorer consultation by any organisation in relation to any project in my 14 years in parliament. Can we do better? I urge you to do better.

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

The member for Ballarat, the shadow infrastructure minister, admitted at the start of her contribution that maths wasn't her strong point. Like her, I preferred English and history at school, but certainly Lyn Kensey and John Zoglmann were great teachers. John Egan was my favourite, but I digress. When you see the infrastructure rollout and the spending and funding that we are doing and compare it to what happened previously, it is like comparing chalk and cheese. Investment across our infrastructure pipeline has averaged $8 billion a year since 2013-14. Under Labor, it was $6 billion a year. I know that the member for Ballarat would realise and acknowledge that there is a $2 billion difference. More than 220 major Australian government funded projects are now under construction, with more than 124 projects starting construction in the last financial year. Since coming to government, 449 major projects have been completed. Many members have spoken about the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program, a $1.5 billion program. More than $1.2 billion of that has been approved across 5,169 projects. This is such a boon, particularly for regional communities. Around $640 million has already been paid to councils and, as we heard from minister for local government, there are 537 of them. Under our $2 billion road safety package, announced in last year's budget, almost a billion dollars for approximately 700 projects has been approved under tranche 1.

We pay on milestones, and this is something that has been raised today. We don't spend money on works that have not been delivered. Labor might have because Labor paid for a lot of things that weren't ever delivered. I don't seek to bolster state budgets. What I do is I seek to pay when projects have reached milestones or are completed. The states give us their estimated cash flows for how they think they can spend our commitments, and we make sure that the Commonwealth money is available. This means we can bring money forward if the states can deliver projects faster. I've said that, and certainly through COVID-19 I have made that promise. Here's an insight: I work well with state Labor infrastructure ministers and I know that the federal urban infrastructure minister does likewise. What we do is prudent financial management. Funding remains available and it's paid to state governments as soon as project delivery milestones are met. There's one other important distinction between Liberals and Nationals and Labor, and that is that, when we're in government, there's an 80-20 split as far as regional programs and projects are concerned. What we see when Labor is in government is that country areas miss out because there is a 50-50 split, so a lot of those projects are never funded.

The member for Blair asked me about Queensland's investment share. I can tell the member that 20.7 per cent of the Commonwealth's investment in infrastructure will go to Queensland over the next decade, which is commensurate with its share of population, 20.2 per cent. If you look at that, they're actually getting more per head of population than they otherwise might have, probably would have under a Labor federal government—God forbid.

Mr Neumann interjecting—

You say over the forward estimates, where it's 21.1 per cent, so there you go. The member for Flynn belled the cat when he said that the onus is on the Queensland government to get on with it. I work well with Glenn Butcher on water infrastructure. In good faith, we want to build infrastructure together and we will. Certainly, Mark Bailey and I have a very good relationship. Not a week goes by when there's no communication between our offices and between ourselves to get things done. Queensland can be, will be, one of the powerhouses for our recovery from COVID. We've committed up to $170 million to upgrade the Cunningham Highway between Yamanto and Ebenezer Creek, including the upgrade of key intersections at Yamanto and Amberley.

Mr Neumann interjecting —

I didn't hear from the member for Blair before I committed that money. It wasn't a Queensland priority, but I made it a Commonwealth priority.

The member for Perth asked me about Western Australian funding. When the WA state government has a $3 billion surplus in a time of financial crisis—in a global pandemic when other states are supporting health and economic outcomes—there is an onus on them to dig deep and spend a bit of money on infrastructure. My time is up. I am sorry about that because I had much more to say. (Time expired)

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Minister for Communications, Urban Infrastructure, Cities and the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's my pleasure to speak on the Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2021-22 in relation to the communications, urban infrastructure, cities and the arts parts of the portfolio. In this budget we've announced $15.2 billion in new and additional funding as part of our rolling 10-year $110 billion infrastructure investment. There is $12.8 billion forecast for the 2021-22 financial year in infrastructure grant expenditure, including these significant urban projects: $2.6 billion for the North-South Corridor's Darlington to Anzac Highway in South Australia; $380 million for the Pakenham roads upgrade in Victoria; $237.5 million for METRONET's Hamilton Street and Wharf Street grade separations; $178 million for the Gold Coast rail line capacity improvement from Kuraby to Beenleigh; $87.5 million for the M5 Motorway's Moorebank Avenue-Hume Highway intersection upgrade in New South Wales; and $44 million for the Rokeby Road-South Arm Road upgrades in Tasmania.

There's a great deal going on in urban infrastructure. It is similar in communications. In telecommunications we've committed $16.4 million under the Peri-Urban Mobile Program for better mobile connectivity in bushfire-prone areas on the fringes of our big cities. The peri-urban fringe is where the bush often directly interfaces with suburbs, creating bushfire risks for those who live and work there. The Peri-Urban Mobile Program, or PUMP, will complement our government's highly successful Mobile Black Spot Program by addressing mobile reception in areas along the peri-urban fringe that may have poor or no coverage.

In the digital economy area—and we've made significant announcements as part of our Digital Economy Strategy—we're providing $18.8 million over four years for a digital games tax offset. The global video games development market is worth around $250 billion, which is considerably bigger than the global movie sector. This tax offset will help Australian digital games developers to take a greater share of this global pie. It will drive investment and growth in the sector and help attract and build the creative digital skills needed in the economy. We already have significant skills in the film sector—and in special effects and many adjacencies—in businesses like Rising Sun Pictures, Animal Logic and so on. There's a considerable depth of skills in the sector in Australia already, many of which are very much adjacent to the skills required to be successful in the digital games sector. We already have a number of digital games businesses and we expect more will be attracted to Australia under this initiative.

In the area of community broadcasting we've committed $8.8 million in this year's budget. Australia's 450 community radio broadcasters will benefit from this measure, securing the sector as a valuable source of local news and platforms for local stories. We've also committed $15 million over two years to the AAP Newswire service in support of public interest journalism in regional Australia under the Public Interest News Gathering program. That's in addition to the $55 million already provided by the government to regional broadcasters under the Public Interest News Gathering program.

Our media bargaining code is a world-leading development responding to the way that digital platforms, like Facebook, Google and others, have driven fundamental changes in the way media content is produced, distributed and consumed. In this year's budget, we're committing $4.2 million to support the implementation of our news media bargaining code. That will enable the Australian Communications and Media Authority to fulfil its functions under the code of making sure news media businesses are fairly remunerated for the content they generate.

We're supporting the development and distribution of quality children's content, providing $11.9 million over four years to boost such content through the Australian Children's Television Foundation, on top of $20 million over two years from 2021-22 which we announced in last year's budget that is directed towards the development, production and distribution of high-quality Australian children's content.

When it comes to the arts, I, sadly, don't have time to do justice to the enormous amount of funding that we're committing to the arts sector. There is $85.4 million in this year's budget to support the preservation of Australia's cultural heritage for the benefit of all Australians. That will support the delivery of public services and programs to access our national collections, including institutions such as the National Gallery of Australia. I hope I'll be asked more questions about the arts in the course of today.

Michelle Rowland (Greenway, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Communications) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister for Communications, Urban Infrastructure, Cities and the Arts. In November 2020, in this place, and in the year before that, in September 2019, also in this place, I asked the minister what steps he had taken, including those taken in consultation with the Attorney-General and other relevant ministers, to address the issue of online racism in Australia. This was in reference to the terrorist atrocity committed by an Australian citizen in Christchurch and serious warnings about the rise of right-wing extremism, online hate speech and racism in Australia. I asked the minister if he would ensure that Australians, including Australians of Muslim faith, are kept safe online by amending Australia's e-safety laws or by driving the adoption of an EU-style code of conduct for countering illegal hate speech online.

In 2019, the minister responded to my question by saying: 'I make the point that we are committed to introducing a new online safety act.' In 2020, the minister simply failed to answer the question. In late 2020, the minister finally released the exposure draft of the Online Safety Bill 2021 for public consultation. In its submission to the exposure draft, the Online Hate Prevention Institute stated:

Significant online harm also results from hate and incitement to violence that targets segments of the community, as distinct from the cyberbullying of individuals.

This is a significant gap of coverage in this area. The institute continued:

Attributes such as race, religion, mental or physical illness or disability, sexual orientation, gender identity/expression, intersex status and others are used to target segments of the community. In the most serious cases online hate against these groups involves incitement not only to hate, but also to violence. Preventing online harms requires action well before it reaches that point.

It also stated:

… a takedown power covering incitement to hate, against both individuals and groups, is urgently needed.

Minister, does the Online Safety Bill now before the parliament address racist hate speech and incitement to violence that targets groups, as distinct from individuals, and, if not, why not?

Mark Coulton (Parkes, Deputy-Speaker, Minister for Regional Health, Regional Communications and Local Government) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'll leave it to the minister to answer the question. I would like to explain some of the programs that were in the budget and what they actually mean for regional communications. One of the positives out of COVID-19 and the recent pandemic has been the interest of people in moving to and working from regional Australia. The fact that people can work—

A division having been called in the House of Representatives—

Sitting suspended from 11:23 to 11:4 9

As I was saying before the division was called, there's been a massive shift in the work people are doing from regional Australia, and not only the residents of regional Australia. We are seeing a massive movement to the regions of people who understand they can work remotely and be just as effective, connected not only to the capital cities but internationally as well. NBN Co are doing their bit. In locations right across regional Australia they're developing business enterprise zones with enterprise level broadband at city prices, which is proving to be a real game changer.

In other areas, one of the programs that the government and I are particularly proud of is the Regional Connectivity Program. It's quite a broad program in nature. It is designed to deliver data—and, to some extent, voice—to regional areas where there is a greater need for capacity. From the first round, 80 locations right across Australia will now have access to high-capacity broadband to enable not only communications but a lot of technological advances, particularly in agriculture and mining, with remote monitoring of soil moisture, livestock and the like.

It also affects safety in tourism. Last week I was in Tasmania, at the Tahune Airwalk. Tahune Airwalk is an iconic location in Tasmania, adjacent to the Warra ecosystem observatory. When the fires hit that part of the world a couple of years ago, there were actually 500 people on site, where there was no viable means of communication. So, in conjunction with TasmaNet, they will be delivering a wi-fi system across the complete Tahune Airwalk site and the adjoining Warra ecosystem observatory. They'll have connectivity not only for visitors but also for some of the valuable scientific research that is going on in that location. Right across Australia another 50 projects were announced from round 2, which was in the budget, with more to come.

More money has been allocated to connectivity in the northern part of Australia. We have also funded round 6 of the Mobile Black Spot program. We've already funded 1,200 towers in the first five rounds. About 927 of those are up and running. Round 6 will come online later in the year. Round 6 will be designed to make sure that we've got mobile coverage in some of those thinner markets where it's less profitable for the telcos. It's important that people that live in those parts of Australia have the same level of connectivity as their larger regional and city counterparts.

This budget further enhances our focus and the work that we have done on connectivity across regional Australia. There's always more to do. Regional Australians are very innovative. They have the ability to invent ways to use data as it becomes available, and this government recognises that fact. We are delivering high-capacity broadband and voice services right across regional Australia so that they can continue to carry this country out of COVID-19.

Josh Burns (Macnamara, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have many questions for the Minister for Communications, Urban Infrastructure, Cities and the Arts today in this consideration in detail stage, and they all focus on the fact that this government is doing too little to support our artists in some of the most difficult times that they have ever experienced. We all remember, at the start of this pandemic, when the Prime Minister made the announcement about the restrictions on gatherings. That was in the early days, when the Prime Minister was still involved in decision-making on the pandemic. He completely removed himself from that, but that's a story for another day.

Why did this government race to go and do a press conference with Guy Sebastian in June last year but then wait until the end of the financial year to bother to start paying artists and supporting artistic and creative organisations in this country? The arts and entertainment sector in this country is worth $100 billion to the economy. Hundreds of thousands of Australians work in the arts and entertainment sector. Bar none, this last year has been the most difficult year for all of them. Yet this government was more interested in doing press conferences with Guy Sebastian—who had to end up publicly justifying that press conference—because this government, like it always does, was all about the announcement and not about the delivery. Not about actually supporting artists or actually getting the money out the door; only about doing the flashy announcement and getting the Prime Minister to do his photo op—not in a truck or a plane, but with Guy Sebastian this time.

Why is the government leaving artistic Australians behind? Why is the government leaving creative industries and creative businesses behind? Why did this government choose to deliberately design the JobKeeper program so that it excluded those working in the creative industries? The very nature of the creative industries means that the people working in them are often in short-term project work. It means that you're not often in a job, a production or a film for any more than a few months. That's the nature of the work. It means it's unstable. I know that there are members on the opposite side who are well aware of how difficult it is to make it as an artist in this country. But that then begs the question: why did the government design a wage subsidy program that would mean that those Australians would be disconnected from the very organisations that they were associated with and disconnected from businesses?

If you want to see exactly where the priorities lie for this government when it comes to the creative industries and when it comes to the department of the arts, if you want to see exactly what this government thinks and how much it values the department of the arts and the creative industries in Australia—if they actually valued it, it would still be a standalone department; it wouldn't be tucked away in a back drawer somewhere in the department of infrastructure and transport. What on earth do transport and infrastructure have to do with the arts, unless you're building a road to a new theatre? It boggles me. I don't get it. Why are we in this country turning artists into, somehow, a function of the department of transport and infrastructure? It makes no sense and it shows that the government doesn't value artists and doesn't value those people working in the creative industries in this country. If they did value artists in this country, they would show them the respect of having their own department, not burying it in the back drawer of the department of transport and infrastructure.

The final question I have for the minister is around the events sector. The events sector are absolutely on their knees at the moment. The events sector saw what happened as we came out of the pandemic second wave last year and had a little bit of stability over summer when they set up the Byron Bay Bluesfest, and then they had to cancel it after one COVID case. They saw the damage of what this pandemic can do to a massive event like that. What have they asked for from the government? They've asked for some sort of assistance around insurance so that, if they do schedule programs and they do schedule these massive events, there will be some form of insurance so that these companies aren't liable for everything. This government has been silent on it. Too little, too late. It's all about the announcement, not about the delivery, and then they bury the department of the arts in the department of transport and infrastructure, leaving Australian artists behind.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Minister for Communications, Urban Infrastructure, Cities and the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member who just spoke, Mr Burns, is not somebody who has often made comment on arts policy, to my knowledge, and seems to have been handed a brief that's a year and a half out of date, with this ridiculous argument that arts is not in the name of the department. These are the facts: no government has ever provided more funding for the arts than the Morrison government in 2021-22, with over $1 billion of funding for the arts. It's not Labor that has delivered that. Labor always talk a game about their support for the arts. It's the coalition that has consistently provided support for the arts.

In this year's budget, there is $100 million to extend the RISE Fund, $18 million for regional arts, $293 million for our collecting institutions, $257 million for film and television, $219 million for the Australia Council, $48.9 million for Indigenous arts, languages and repatriation—over $1 billion in arts funding.

Government Member:

A government member interjecting—

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Minister for Communications, Urban Infrastructure, Cities and the Arts) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

An enormous amount of money. We have been focused, since COVID began, on how we could support this sector, and we moved very quickly. We had the extraordinary criticism that we announced our response too quickly from the same party who, on the other hand, criticised us for taking too long.

We provided a $250 million creative economy package, announced in late June of last year, and since then we've provided very substantial additional funding. Why are we doing that? Because of the jobs that the arts sector can deliver. The jobs are not just within the arts; if you go and see a show, movie, exhibition or musical, you probably go to a restaurant, a bar or a cafe; you might stay overnight in a hotel; and you might jump on a plane to go interstate. We're focused on supporting and building our arts sector. There are unprecedented levels of funding, and, frankly, just about everything the member said seemed to be out of touch with reality.

Proposed expenditure agreed to.

David Littleproud (Maranoa, National Party, Minister for Agriculture, Drought and Emergency Management) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a great honour to stand here today after what is another record budget for agriculture. This is the environment that we are putting around Australian agriculture despite all the headwinds that we have faced over the last 18 months, whether they be drought, fires, floods, cyclones or even COVID-19. ABARES estimated agriculture would hit $60 billion at the end of this financial year, and only yesterday they finalised that number to be $66.3 billion. That's an outstanding result. Of that, $47 billion is exports, and ABARES are estimating that next year those exports will get to just under $50 billion, but that was before we signed the free trade agreement with the UK 24 hours ago. So I'm confident that we will crack the $50 bill with a little bit of rain.

Our job in supporting agriculture's ambitious goal $100 billion by 2030 is simply putting the environment and infrastructure around it, and that's why we've created the Ag2030 plan. Seven pillars are backed by money, money not only put out in this May budget but also committed in the October budget. We committed over $400 million in that budget, and now another $850 million has been committed to support the seven pillars of Australian agriculture's Ag2030 plan. That's around making sure we can continue to diversify markets. Yesterday we got an in-principle agreement for free trade agreement No. 15. That's an outstanding result that allows our exporters to send their product into new markets, so it's an exciting opportunity.

We're also making sure that we're investing in the infrastructure to make it easy to export—that is, in technology; in streamlining; in digitising platforms, with a significant investment of over $300 million into digitising that platform we put in last year's budget, which is rolling out now; and in having more boots on the ground across the globe to make sure that we can get better market access. Our agricultural council in the UK played a pivotal role in the achievement of that announcement yesterday.

It's also significantly about protecting brand Australia. There was a $400 million investment under the second pillar, which is biosecurity. This is understanding there's an evolution of threats and how we evolve not only the management of them but also the technology around them. There have been 79 new biosecurity officer jobs created on the front line, plus we've invested in more paws on the ground and, more importantly, 20 new scientists. That means we can identify diseases and pests that may be found here quicker so that we can have real-time action in addressing them. That's important.

We're also investing in technology. We're the first country to undertake 3D X-ray scanning for biosecurity threats to make sure that we identify those threats at ports and postal services. All 144 million parcels that go through Australia Post will now go through a 3D X-ray scanner, which we have created algorithms for, and artificial intelligence will be able to identify plant life, organic matter—even a live animal. New Zealand has signed up to that technology, and we hope to use it in airports as well very soon.

It's also about the third pillar, infrastructure. There will be an extra $1½ billion for roads right across the country to make sure we can get products from paddock to plate as quickly as we possibly can. We're also looking at manufacturing opportunities of going further through the supply chain with the $1.3 billion Modern Manufacturing Initiative. That also looks at some of the vulnerabilities in agricultural inputs. We need to understand, in a changing global environment, how to protect the agricultural inputs that are pivotal to Australian agriculture.

We're also looking at our innovation systems, understanding the important role they play. Each year, $1.1 billion goes into research and development. There are 15 research and development corporations, and we're now looking to get back to first principles in streamlining them and getting value for levy-payers and taxpayers. We're making sure that the research we're doing isn't duplicated, that we commercialise it, and that it's rolled out and extended to the farm gate. That's why we've invested in eight drought innovation hubs close to farmers, so they can get this research and technology—touch it, feel it, use it—in regional universities, not in big cities that are too far away for many of them.

Most importantly, we're investing in our people. There is a significant investment in reducing university costs to encourage young people to get into agriculture. In reducing those university costs by 59 per cent we've seen a 120 per cent increase in ag courses at the University of Queensland this year. The environmental infrastructure we're putting around Australian agriculture is important. It's driving growth and driving our economy.

Kristy McBain (Eden-Monaro, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Farmers right across my region have proven time and again that they are some of the most resilient people I know. But they have been tested. For years, local farmers have modernised and amended their farming practices in order to meet the challenge of ongoing drought. Then they were hit with the devastating Black Summer bushfires which tore through our region. And over the past 18 months they have once again been tested and have found ways to continue their businesses despite multiple floods and the COVID-19 pandemic. So today I rise to raise awareness of the some of the ongoing issues that have continued to affect farmers in my region.

I want to make it clear that farmers are not sitting idly by expecting handouts. Eden-Monaro farmers are innovative and forward thinking, and they're doing everything they can to survive and prosper. Sheep farmers across the Monaro plains are worried about our dependency on China to keep the wool industry afloat. During COVID, China was the only market supporter for Australian wool as other buyer countries, including India, Italy and other European countries, ceased purchasing wool entirely. In gross terms, China purchases around 70 per cent of Australia's greasy wool. The wool industry therefore is significantly exposed to any potential disruption through trade tensions. Simply speaking, restrictions on Australian wool exports into China would likely have a crippling impact on the industry.

On top of this, the shearing industry is significantly affected by labour shortages. We know farmers are hardworking, but across the entire area of the Eden-Monaro electorate they are having trouble finding labour, which means their workload is tougher and greater, and it clearly isn't sustainable. Even when workers have been found, sourcing rental accommodation for them in the region has been a barrier to employment. This isn't a new problem. We've been talking about workforce shortages in agriculture—and in hospitality, retail and tourism—for far too long. It's time for the government to get serious about addressing the issue. The government has failed to take responsibility for labour shortages. Farmers need this fixed.

Another concern for Eden-Monaro agriculture is the budget cuts to pasture and animal science in the CSIRO. Funding for research in these areas has been decimated in recent years, with key researchers now unable to pursue any fully funded CSIRO projects. Instead, they have to rely on funding partnerships with levy funded groups in order to obtain any budget leverage. This is having a detrimental effect on both the progressiveness and the amount of research and development occurring in agriculture right now, and it will hurt the Australian agriculture industry into the future.

Lastly, cooperative farming groups, such as Monaro Farming Systems, play an important role in the development of sustainable and productive farming practices. The long-term security and consistency in having a paid executive officer is essential to keeping these groups going. But in 2018 the government cut federal Landcare funding, meaning that many of these groups are now unable to find long-term options for employing a coordinator to oversee admin, research coordination, marketing, member support, grant applications and acquittal. Even when farmers are banding together to get ahead, they are still being left behind. Farmers have been doing it tough, and it's tougher when the government isn't listening to their concerns. My questions to the minister are: is there a plan to deal with the potential disruption to the wool industry export market? Farmers need R & D to continue so that they can futureproof their farms. Why has funding been cut from pasture and animal science at CSIRO, which funds essential research projects? What is the immediate plan to address labour shortages in the industry—and I mean immediate? Will the government commit to coordinator funding for cooperative farming groups so that our farmers can continue to get ahead?

Damian Drum (Nicholls, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's a privilege to speak today on behalf of the Liberal-National coalition government about its commitment to backing Australia's primary producers. As the member for Nicholls, I am proud to represent one of the most productive agricultural regions in country. Over the last 18 months, on a daily basis we've heard words and phrases like 'resilience', 'adaptability' and 'the ability to bounce back' being bandied about and those words were applied to all sorts of different situations. But I believe Australian farmers have written a book on resilience, adaptability and bouncing back. These characteristics just seem to be in their DNA. Despite one of the worst droughts in history, a global pandemic and natural disasters including bushfires, floods and now a mouse plague, we see agricultural production has hit $66 billion, with a target of $100 billion by 2030 firmly in its sights. Not only are our farmers resilient but they're also entrepreneurial. They are business men and women, land stewards, real conservationists, while at the same time embracing the cutting edge of science and technology to produce the greenest and cleanest food and fibre in the world, and they produce it for the world as well.

The coalition is right behind our farmers, and in this budget there's $233 million in new funding to help implement the National Soil Strategy and a $120 million investment in the national soil monitoring and incentives pilot, which will bolster our understanding of Australia's soil condition and improve how our soil can be managed. One of the most significant commitments to agriculture by this government is the $5 billion Future Drought Fund. This fund provides secure and continuous funding for drought resilience initiatives. It's no good running around in the middle of a drought trying to find the answers. It's a matter of investing in the better years to make sure that the answers are there, ready and waiting, for when droughts hit so that programs can be implemented. Each and every year $100 million will be made available from this $5 billion fund to support Australian farmers and communities to prepare for and become more resilient to the effects of future droughts. As part of this fund, the government is importantly investing in eight drought resilience adoption and innovation hubs across the country. The research and adoption program will help farmers and regional communities build drought resilience through investment and collaborative research, development, extension and adoption.

The Victorian hub will be based in my electorate of Nicholls, at the University of Melbourne's Dookie campus. There are also going to be five nodes across Victoria that directly affect the diverse farming systems that the state has, as well as a node in the southern Riverina within New South Wales. These farming systems include dairy, horticulture, cropping, beef and sheep and viticulture. The hub nodes will be based in the north-west, the north-east, the south-west, Gippsland and the north-west irrigated areas. The program's going to be a grassroots program, so it's going to deliver practical solutions for our farmers, the communities that they support and the communities that support them. The University of Melbourne will be taking a direct lead in this, with Professor Tim Reeves and Professor Ruth Nettle as directors. Importantly, this is a collaborative program that draws upon the best of the best in agricultural research and resources in agribusiness within Victoria. Hub members are to going to include Agriculture Victoria, the Birchip Cropping Group, Deakin University, Federation University, Food and Fibre Gippsland, La Trobe University, Riverine Plains Inc., Southern Farming Systems and Mallee Regional Innovation Centre. This is just another example of how this government is getting behind our farmers so that they can adopt the newest technologies that are available to them, increasing their ability to become even more resilient. In times of difficulty, that's when we need to have done all the work in the better years. It is very important that the government invests in the infrastructure that's going to enable our farmers to adapt with the latest technology but also to get their produce to market. Over the last few days we've seen increased trade deals, more and better trade deals, to give our farmers better markets and better farm gate prices. That is also critical to the nature of what we are doing. I congratulate the minister, Mr Littleproud, and the Treasurer for delivering this initiative within the budget, an initiative that backs our farmers and regional Australia.

Fiona Phillips (Gilmore, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the shadow minister for agriculture for allowing me to ask some questions to the minister on behalf of a number of constituents in my electorate, and I look forward to the minister's reply. Farming and agriculture, right through to food and wine trails, are so important in the electorate of Gilmore. They are important for jobs, our community, local spending, tourism and more.

My first question to the minister is: in these strange world times of drought, bushfires, floods, pandemic and plague, and considering local farmers are already finding it difficult to find workers, can the minister guarantee that, after the latest Australia-UK trade deal, which will see 10,000 UK visa holders no longer required to work on Australian farms during their stay, local farmers will still have access to farm workers? The National Farmers Federation have expressed their concerns about when the ag visa will be delivered. My next question is: given the likely delay in the ag visa's implementation, how will the government manage that transition so that no local farmers will be left worse off? Given the government's plan to grow Australian agriculture to $100 billion by 2030, what plans does the government have to invest more in attracting, training, mentoring and retaining local workers on farms? Where is the strategic workforce plan for our agriculture industries?

Given constituents in my electorate have seen so many disasters, when will the government provide a national response to the mouse plague? Not only are they contending with mice, but farmers and people in Kangaroo Valley are also very concerned about the ever-growing carp plague in the beautiful Kangaroo River. What are the government's plans to address the ever-growing problem of carp in our waterways?

David Littleproud (Maranoa, National Party, Minister for Agriculture, Drought and Emergency Management) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's quite interesting that members of the Labor Party are interested in bringing in workers from overseas, when their masters, the AWU, have been so vitriolic about the fact that we are now trying to support Australian agriculture with seasonal workers from ASEAN countries. The way the AWU is demonising Australian farmers with this generalisation that they are exploiting workers is disgraceful. If you want to generalise, we could generalise about the union movement. Weren't there a whole lot of union members that actually went to jail?

An opposition member: How is this relevant?

Weren't there a whole lot of union members that actually have been found guilty? So, if you want to demonise Australian farmers—

Opposition members interjecting—

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order!

David Littleproud (Maranoa, National Party, Minister for Agriculture, Drought and Emergency Management) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

actually look at your own backyard. The AWU are a disgrace, and they are your gods.

Opposition members interjecting—

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Order!

David Littleproud (Maranoa, National Party, Minister for Agriculture, Drought and Emergency Management) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They are your gods that are looking after you.

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order, Minister! I remind the minister to be relevant.

David Littleproud (Maranoa, National Party, Minister for Agriculture, Drought and Emergency Management) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am. We're talking about seasonal workers. We are talking about bringing in new seasonal workers for support. That is what we have done in finding 25,000 men and women from 10 Pacific nations. We have brought 7,000 in and we would bring more in if not for the states. They have to give the health tick, and unfortunately—

Mike Freelander (Macarthur, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! Minister, you are reminded again to be relevant. The time allocated for this debate has expired. The Federation Chamber will now consider the environment segment of the Agriculture, Water and the Environment portfolio, in accordance with the agreed order of consideration.

Sussan Ley (Farrer, Liberal Party, Minister for the Environment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker Freelander, I appreciate you bringing calm to the chamber. I would like to update the Federation Chamber about the budget that has been so well received. In the last two budgets since 2019 there has been $2 billion of new spending on the environment, reflecting this government's deep commitment to secure our incredible natural places not just for now but for generations to come. We will strengthen our economy and create jobs. We will also deliver practical on-the ground outcomes and long-term national reform for our environment. We are building a more resilient and secure Australia. As part of the 2021-22 budget there's $486.3 million in new environmental funding for oceans, biodiversity, recycling and waste, and climate resilience.

Oceans and the Great Barrier Reef feature nationally and internationally. We're investing $100 million in an oceans package that strengthens our global leadership in marine management and ocean protection and that boosts regional employment. It includes $30 million to restore coastal marine ecosystems that draw carbon out of the atmosphere—mangroves, seagrasses and tidal marshes; $39 million to expand our marine park network into the Indian Ocean and protect 45 per cent of Australian waters; over $11 million to incorporate sea country into Indigenous protected areas across nine locations; and $18 million to target practical actions to protect our iconic marine species.

This builds on the Morrison government's $67 million investment in last year's budget to tackle the impacts of ghost nets and plastic litter, to enhance the management of Australian marine parks and to re-establish oyster reefs all along our coastline. We'll also continue to assist tourism operators on the Great Barrier Reef by waiving the environmental management charge for a further 12 months. We know coming out of COVID that the tourism operators that showcase our beautiful natural environment have had some tough times.

I must mention the Australian Climate Service. This service will bring together and analyse information from the Bureau of Meteorology, CSIRO, Geoscience Australia and the Australian Bureau of Statistics, informing the work of Emergency Management Australia and the new National Recovery and Resilience Agency. That's nearly $210 million of new money to do something that is genuinely world-leading—to provide the intelligence and localised mapping capability for deep understanding at local communities about the impacts not just of disasters but climate change. You hear the expression 'build back better'. We really mean it with the Australian Climate Service. It will give us the tools and the data that will be vital for the future. It will fill a gap. It will be well respected and I suggest copied internationally.

The assistant minister will talk to the Federation Chamber about our exciting recycling and waste agenda. We're of course investing in the reforms to the EPBC Act. They were backed in in this budget with $9 million to establish and fund the operation of an independent environment assurance commissioner; $2.7 million for a pilot regional plan for a priority development region in partnership with a state or territory, and everyone wants these regional plans to succeed; funding to support stakeholder engagement for Indigenous cultural heritage protection, so necessary after the Juukan Gorge disaster; and $17 million to maintain improved assessment times under the EPBC Act.

We will invest $29 million in additional funding to protect native species and their habitats from invasive pest animals and weeds. It's not the whole substance of our work with threatened species and biodiversity, but it's an important addition because when you get the Commonwealth and states investing at the same time, particularly at the interface between private and public land when it comes to invasive pests, that's when you can get some fantastic results. Working with communities and having their input as well is incredibly important. The new funding complements existing investment in bushfire recovery for native species and habitats, safe havens and the new 10-year Threatened Species Strategy.

The new budget measures are in addition to the Morrison government's continued commitment to the environment in Antarctica, our Recycling Modernisation Fund, the second phase of the National Environmental Science Program—there's $149 million in that—and the continued rollout of our bushfire recovery funding, our heritage funding and our regional land partnerships. Our budget demonstrates our continuing approach to practical on-the-ground action to protect, preserve and enhance our incredible natural environment.

Terri Butler (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is such an important portfolio. Australia is a world leader in mammal extinctions. It's a very, very sad distinction to hold. Of course, the world is facing up to the need for diversity protection and for protecting habitats. It is to be hoped that Australia doesn't get left behind. Recently, the second 10-yearly review of the nation's principal environment laws, the EPBC Act, was conducted. The review was led by Professor Graeme Samuel, appointed by the government to conduct this review. Professor Samuel recently released his final report of that review. In that report, he recommended a staged approach to environmental reforms. He set out a first-stage approach, which was very considered and very thoughtful, but unfortunately the government seems hell-bent on completely ignoring it, and are instead dusting off some 2014 provisions from a bill that was unsuccessful in that year, and some proposed written standards that were prepared in support of that bill.

As the minister mentioned, the budget does go to EPBC reform. There are some matters in the budget for EPBC reform. But it seems very clear that the minister and the government's approach to EPBC reform does not enjoy broad support. As I said, the bill and the standards that they've produced really reflect the propositions that they put forward in 2014, propositions that a number of us who were in the parliament at the time spoke against. I was one of them. I spoke about my concerns about that 2014 bill.

Where we are now is that in his final report Professor Samuel put forward, amongst a suite of proposed reforms as a first stage of reforms—and of course he proposes a staged process—some recommendations in respect of national environmental standards. This is, as I say, an important review. It's a review in which Professor Samuel said that the current environmental trajectory is unsustainable, the natural environment is in decline and the threats are growing. This is a respected person in the Australian community, an experienced regulator, someone hand-picked by the government to give them advice. He has now done that and he's said those things. As I said, amongst the first tranche of reforms he proposed, he put forward some recommendations about national environmental standards. The government has disregarded those.

A number of people with significant expertise and history in environmental protection have expressed some serious concerns about the government's proposed environmental standards. There was a Senate inquiry in relation to the government's proposed bill. In the submissions to that inquiry, Professor Craig Moritz, from the Australian Academy of Science, said:

Regrettably, the standards that are now proposed—these interim standards—are not scientifically credible.

Professor Brendan Wintle, from the Threatened Species Recovery Hub, said this bill takes us back. He said:

We're taking steps down a pathway, and we have no map. We haven't got a clear strategy or response from the government about how they're going to address Professor Samuel's recommendations; we're just stepping out into the void, as far as I can tell.

Professor Helene Marsh, Chair of the EPBC statutory Threatened Species Scientific Committee, in response to a question about whether she was concerned, said:

Yes, I am. The Threatened Species Scientific Committee was very extensively involved with the Samuel review. We worked with him, we met with him several times, we put in two very extensive expertise based submissions, we spent a lot of time with his team and we worked very closely on the standards. I don't think that his standards are perfect but I think that legally enforceable, outcome focused, granular standards are really, really important. I am disappointed that the proposed interim standards don't reflect the considerable amount of work that was done towards outcome focused standards. Professor Samuel's report only included a number of them, but he made a very clear list of the suite that was needed in the first instance. The Threatened Species Scientific Committee very much supports the development of the full suite of outcome focused standards as a critical step in moving forward.

She also said:

… I was very surprised, particularly as we had been consulted so extensively … and had put in so much work … with great enthusiasm, because we saw this 10-year statutory review as such an opportunity for change.

So my question to the government is: will they now listen to the experts, listen to the review panel, put aside their ideologically driven changes from 2014 and come back with something sensible for the opposition and the community to consider?

Bridget Archer (Bass, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As a farmer, I understand firsthand the impact that pest animals can have on the land, and I welcome the government's continued commitment to supporting farmers and land managers to manage established pest animals and weeds. The new $29.1 million investment will help protect native species from the significant threats which invasive pest animals and weeds present to our natural environment. They not only reduce agricultural productivity but also damage natural resources. The challenge that feral cats present to Australian wildlife was a matter explored recently by the Standing Committee on the Environment and Energy, of which I'm a member, and the committee's recent report Tackling the feral cat pandemic: a plan to save Australian wildlife made a number of recommendations on how the impact of feral cats on our native wildlife and ecological communities can be managed.

Today I'd like to highlight a very successful program in the northern Tasmanian region of Bass, which I represent. Over the past 18 months, the West Tamar Landcare group, funded to the tune of $20,000 through the Communities Environment Program, have tackled the issue of cat predation on native wildlife and cats as vectors for diseases such as toxoplasmosis in the lower west Tamar region. I'd also like to note the contribution of West Tamar Council, NRM North, Tamar NRM and Cradle Coast Authority NRM, who have provided in-kind support for the project. The project area is situated at the mouth of the Tamar estuary and is an important breeding and habitat area for nationally listed fauna species, including the hooded plover, Tasmanian devil, spotted-tail quoll and eastern barred bandicoot. These species and other local wildlife such as wombats, native birds and globally migrating shorebirds are highly valued by local residents. The project undertook a combined strategy, which included working with West Tamar Council and the state government to promote responsible pet ownership; reminding owners to keep pet cats contained and safe; encouraging and providing incentives to residents of the project area to desex and microchip their cats; and running a coordinated trapping program in rural areas and Crown reserves, consistent with the Cat Management Act and the national guidelines for cage-trapping feral cats.

In short, the project, run over two seasons from December 2019 until this month, has trapped across the whole of the 6½ thousand hectare project area, including in national parks and reserves with appropriate consent; has removed close to 60 feral cats from farm and bushland areas, resulting in the protection of up to 6,000 native animals and birds from predation each year; has given the landcare group the opportunity to learn and share considerable expertise in humane and ethical trapping of animals and to generate associated community awareness; and has generated widespread support for the project and awareness of local native wildlife. The project has been a collaborative effort and has also given the West Tamar Landcare group the opportunity to build strong relationships with the West Tamar Council and NRM North. Through this partnership, the group have sought to have the project area declared a cat management area under the state Cat Management Act and to secure ongoing support for a continuation of the trapping program in future years.

One of the most pleasing results of the project was the discovery of Tasmanian devils, quolls and bandicoots in the project area, with the numbers of these animals trapped and released in the second year of trapping roughly double that in the first year. It's particularly pleasing to note that the Tasmanian devils trapped and released were all healthy and showed no visible tumours, and, as some devils were half grown, it indicates that breeding is occurring between healthy devils in the area. In addition to reports of improved lambing percentages, there has also been considerable anecdotal and actual evidence that the removal of cats has increased native animal and bird populations, including those of quolls and bandicoots, which Minister Ley and I were lucky enough to witness firsthand earlier this year in the Tamar region when two 12-week-old bandicoots were released back into the wild as part of the program, supported by $1.7 million in federal government funding, to protect the eastern barred bandicoot.

To ensure that the project has a sound legacy and ongoing community understanding and support, the project committee is now considering a further public education campaign around responsible cat ownership through public art activity and signage using public spaces and buildings in some of the key towns in the lower west Tamar area. This project is a perfect example of how government funding for community run and owned programs can make a tangible difference to the environment. I'd like to thank Peter Voller, Vanessa Bleyer, Greg Squires, Jane Shapter and all those involved in the project for their fantastic work. Can the minister expand on how the federal government is supporting these on-ground efforts to fight the significant impacts of feral animals and weeds?

Josh Wilson (Fremantle, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for the Environment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm glad to be able to ask some questions about the environment portfolio. There is a broad question that sits over the more specific queries—that is, whether the minister believes it's the core responsibility of that role to stand up for and fight for the protection of Australia's environment and Australia's heritage. What we seem to get instead is an approach of excusing or defending a number of areas of unacceptable environmental degradation and neglect; an approach that gaslights and directs opprobrium against Australians who care about and campaign for the health of our environment; and an approach that assumes, somehow, it's the job of the environment minister to consider first and foremost the needs of industry, when industry—I'm pretty sure, coming from Western Australia—is quite confident in its ability to argue its own cause in a way that endangered species are not. In any case, of course, industry has a number of ministers responsible for its specific issues. Shouldn't the Minister for the Environment be an unapologetic champion for the interests of the Australian environment, especially when you consider that our land and our sea have already endured very significant harm and are, in the words of the government's own appointed reviewer, on a trajectory of further decline?

It was only a year ago the Juukan Gorge tragedy occurred, with destruction by Rio Tinto of First Nations heritage of immeasurable value. That fiasco had several components, including failures by this government, especially in its administration of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Heritage Protection Act. What has occurred since that tragedy to make sure it never happens again? The government previously committed to reviewing the ATSIHPA by December 2017. That didn't happen. That was 3½ years ago. When is the government going to review and reform this critical and underperforming safety net for the protection of Indigenous cultural heritage of immeasurable value? Why isn't the government looking to include Graeme Samuel's interim standards for national and World Heritage protection in its reform of the EPBC? Is it really acceptable that the department's timetable for work on this issue, after Juukan Gorge, with respect to heritage protection under the EPBC, only includes the following: for the first half of next year 'to continue engagement on modernisation of Indigenous cultural heritage protection' and then, in the first half of the following year, all the way into 2023, 'to establish a pathway for implementing modernised Indigenous cultural heritage protections released'. So, 3½ years from the time they'd committed to the ATSIHPA review and reform in the first place, we now have to wait another two years just to get to a pathway. All the while, Indigenous cultural heritage is at risk.

It's only two weeks until the government's export ban on mixed plastics comes into force. There's understandable concern about what will actually happen to mixed plastic waste, because the government has failed to ensure we have sufficient infrastructure to recycle and reprocess the waste we've previously sent to other countries. There's no question whatsoever that the government took way too long to come to Labor's position, which was that some direct investment was going to be required. The 2019 Australian Recycling Investment Fund was a joke. It was a complete failure. Not a single dollar was advanced. The face-saving Recycling Modernisation Fund, which followed on its heels, has only advanced $4.5 million to date. It's created no additional plastic reprocessing capacity. There is now a real risk that, beyond 1 July, we will see mixed plastics sent to landfill or otherwise stockpiled, or they will need the benefit of an exemption so they can be exported. In the case of stockpiling, we know that presents fire risks. The government received a report that pointed out that the risk of this occurring wasn't low. Minister, what contingencies are in place to deal with this possibility, and can you guarantee that, beyond 1 July, mixed plastics will not be sent to landfill or dangerously stockpiled?

Earlier this year, the minister listed the Australian sea lion as endangered under the EPBC Act. It's one of 283 listings of threatened or endangered species under this government, a coalition government who kicked off by reducing Labor's network of marine protected areas by 50 per cent, a coalition government whose failed Threatened Species Strategy did not include any focus on marine species. Now we're told that might get corrected under the new strategy, which has just been delivered, several months too late. But the new strategy doesn't have any details, doesn't have any actions, doesn't have any targets and doesn't have any apparent new resources. Minister, in your speech to the Press Club, you accused your opponents, which presumably includes all Australians who rightly want to see proper protection of our environment, of being too focused on activism rather than outcomes. Isn't it the outcomes that are the problem? Isn't that why people are moved to activism? Minister, when are you, as the Minister for the Environment, going to exercise that responsibility rather than being an apologist for a government that has presided over serious and steepening environmental decline?

Trevor Evans (Brisbane, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister for Waste Reduction and Environmental Management) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you to all honourable members for their contributions and their questions. In answer to some of the questions from the member for Fremantle just then, our minister is an unquestionable champion for Australia's environment, as is the whole government. I refer members opposite and everyone who is passionate about the environment and its protection in this country to the minister's Press Club speech given just yesterday, which was an incredibly passionate, thoughtful and powerful speech.

The member for Fremantle has asked questions about the direct investments of our government into the recycling sector. I'd like to inform all members that, in the 10 years before this federal government stepped more heavily into waste and recycling policies with the creation of my assistant ministry in 2019, the total Commonwealth government spending over those 10 years was $30 million. So the average yearly expenditure in this area by federal governments, including many of the years when those opposite were last in government, amounted to approximately $3 million per year. Since 2019 our government has committed over $500 million. So, if my rough maths is accurate, we're talking about something like a 10,000 per cent increase in funding for waste and recycling policies, investments, infrastructure and projects over the last couple of years compared to the years when those opposite were in power. I know the vast majority of the waste and recycling sectors are very supportive of our initiatives and funding. They're voting with their wallets and their feet in making their own co-investments in this space.

Can I also very quickly speak to the question from the member for Bass regarding feral pests and weeds. I inform the member that $29.1 million of additional funding is being invested in programs by this government to protect native species from the horrific threats posed by invasive pest animals and weeds in our natural environment. This funding is part of the broader $400 million biosecurity package announced in this year's budget, and the Commonwealth government will be working with natural resource management groups and Indigenous rangers through on-the-ground action and research to deliver new and innovative measures. It was really great to hear from the member for Bass about the success to date of one of the CEP projects along these lines being rolled out in her electorate of Bass.

The new funding that was announced in this budget complements existing investments in bushfire recovery for native wildlife and habitat, safe havens and a new 10-year threatened species strategy. This year's budget delivers on the next stage of the government's economic plan to secure Australia's recovery from the pandemic, including, as I was referring to earlier, significant reforms, significant initiatives, significant co-funding and significant direct investments in the waste and recycling sector.

I also want to acknowledge and congratulate the member for Bass for her leadership and her interest when it comes to waste and recycling policies, her interest in the circular economy and her role as the co-chair of the Parliamentary Friends of Waste and Recycling. She truly is a waste warrior. I believe the member for Corangamite opposite is the other co-chair, so due credit to the member there as well.

Having legislated the world-leading laws to end the export of contaminated waste streams like mixed plastics, our government has been incredibly busy in driving a massive transformation of this sector in our nation. In total, with the direct funding that's being provided by this government, the co-funding that's being provided by states and territories and the co-investments that we've been able to leverage from industry, we're now talking about close to a $1 billion transformation of Australia's waste and recycling sectors. This level of investment being made in our country in a modern recycling sector is unprecedented. With the Recycling Modernisation Fund of this government and the waste export bans which are coming into place sequentially over the course of this year and future years, we're talking about more than $600 million of co-investment, including those investments that have been delivered from the private sector, from the waste and recycling sectors, as I say, voting with their feet and their wallets to support the government's policies.

So far, the Recycling Modernisation Fund has led to the announcement of 52 new recycling infrastructure projects, in the ACT, in Victoria, in New South Wales, in South Australia and in WA, to recycle our waste plastics, our glass, our tyres and our paper. Watch this space very soon, all honourable members, for announcements about more Recycling Modernisation Fund projects relating to Tasmania and Queensland. I wish I had more time to fill in the detail.

Terri Butler (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's an absolute pleasure to be here with the minister to talk about this very important part of the budget, and that is water, a matter that he and I, as Queenslanders, very much enjoy engaging with. I think we'll both be speaking at the New South Wales local government Water Managers Conference in a couple of weeks. I'm sure that they'll all rub their Origin win in our faces; nonetheless, we'll continue to pursue it. One of the speeches to be made at that very important conference will be by distinguished Professor Lesley Hughes. I've seen a draft program and I believe she will be speaking to delegates about the risks to Australia of a three-degree Celsius warmer world. I know that the minister has some thoughts on climate change that he has been expressing recently. But I think that he would also acknowledge that climate change does pose a serious threat to water availability in the Murray-Darling Basin. Recently ANU Professor Mark Howden made the point that average river flows into the Murray-Darling Basin have dropped by 39 per cent over the past 20 years, and that is mostly due to climate change. In December last year the CSIRO told us that the hydroclimate of the Murray-Darling Basin is changing. CSIRO researchers said that the future would be warmer and is likely to be drier, with more severe droughts. A couple of years ago the government's own drought coordinator-general pointed out the risks of climate change to water availability, again also talking about the contribution of climate change to more frequent and more severe droughts. A range of people have spoken about this issue.

My question to the minister on this topic is: given this scientific evidence about the impact of climate change on reduced inflows into the basin—other people have observed it, the previous inspector-general of the Murray-Darling Basin observed lessening inflows into the basin—how is the minister ensuring that the Murray-Darling Basin Plan is continuously underpinned by the most up-to-date science possible and takes into account climate change and the impacts of climate change on water availability in the basin? How does the minister intend to make sure that the plan does actually deal with these changing environmental conditions that arise as a consequence? Of course, this year has been a wet year. I think we have all been very, very relieved to see the rain, but we shouldn't only care about droughts in dry years. We should, as the saying might be adapted to go, in times of drought, prepare for rain and in times of rain, prepare for drought. We do need to be focused on the possibility of droughts into the future and we also need to remember that drought is felt unevenly across the basin. For example, in our own home state of Queensland, they were still trucking water into Stanthorpe long after a lot of other places had been receiving water and were very wet. How will the government ensure that the continued changes to water availability and the continued reduction, it appears, in inflows will be accommodated?

On the topic of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan, I'd also like the minister to address the progress that's being made in respect of the supply measures that arose out of the SDL adjustment mechanism. What is the progress of those supply measures? What is the progress in terms of actually delivering those environmental outcomes equivalent to 605 gigalitres of water per year? What can the minister tell people in respect of whether or not those measures will be delivered on time?

Are there any of those supply measures that are being reviewed or reconsidered? Particularly, what is the status of the New South Wales measures, which, as the minister would know, the New South Wales government has previously said would not be able to be delivered?

I'd also appreciate it if the minister would address the 450 gigalitres of water that was intended to be provided by efficiency measures. The minister is aware of the independent panel into the Water for the Environment Special Account report last year, which said that of the 450 gigalitres per year only 1.9 gigalitres had been delivered. That report said that the 450 gigalitres would not be delivered. How can the minister assure Australians living in the basin as well as all Australians that the 450 gigalitres will be delivered on time?

Keith Pitt (Hinkler, National Party, Minister for Resources, Water and Northern Australia) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I acknowledge my shadow counterpart, with whom we work well on this very important matter of water, particularly in the Murray-Darling Basin. Regarding the comments around Queensland and the State of Origin, we're a little bit embarrassed about the last score but there are still two to go and I'm confident there'll be a recovery.

In regard to the questions around the modelling and the information being used to inform the MDBA and Murray-Darling Basin communities, we have allocated significant funds in the budget to improve that modelling. That will help to build confidence in governments, water users and communities planning for the future. It is a significant investment, one which has been very much needed and which we have accounted for and provided for in the most recent budget announcements. There will be significant and substantial investment over coming years to update the modelling of the Murray-Darling Basin and how it is utilised right across the basin.

In regard to other questions, I suggest that the shadow minister look at the most recent MINCO minutes and the decisions made and advice provided for an update on the status of projects and where we're at. We've engaged someone to ensure that we have an overview of exactly the position of what is likely to have been done and finished by 2024, and where we're at. Quite simply, we have significant funds left and a significant amount of time in which to perform what is necessary to meet the requirements of the plan.

In regard to questions around New South Wales measures, we're working very closely with New South Wales. Up until last June, they hadn't submitted any of their water resource plans for surface water. We managed to get the groundwater plans put forward to the Murray-Darling Basin Authority for assessment, and they are currently being considered. They are complex and technical and they do take time—as did Victoria's, South Australia's and the ACT's plans—and we are working our way through that in a process which I'm sure the shadow minister will appreciate is difficult. It requires consultation and further toing and froing between us and New South Wales.

In regard to the Menindee Lakes and Yanco projects—about which there have been considerable discussions, particularly in the media—at the most recent MINCO meeting there was an agreement with New South Wales that they would bring forward rescope projects for those two opportunities. They were to do that within a particular time frame. I look forward to New South Wales meeting that time frame and delivering on what they said they would.

In regard to the Off-Farm Efficiency Program, as I announced some weeks ago, we have shifted the Water Efficiency Program funding, or WEP, across to off-farm efficiencies. The advice I have is that we expect up to 150 gigalitres of recovery from doing that. We have at least 50 projects put forward already. We're working very closely with the states to ensure that we can get the best outcome with that funding for the projects themselves and the water that would be returned to the environment as part of the plan.

I think I've addressed the questions that the shadow minister has put forward. I'd like to come back to the budget and the things that we are doing to continue to help those people who live in the Murray-Darling Basin, who work in agriculture and who rely on irrigated water. And not just irrigated water. I'm very pleased that the shadow minister acknowledged that we have had a much better season. There has been significant rainfall and storages are in a much better position than they had been previously. That is very positive and is being felt right across the community and the Murray-Darling Basin as a whole. We are continuing to provide practical advice and support. As the shadow minister said, it's a good time to work on drought infrastructure when it's raining and wet. We have put forward another $50 million for the On-farm Emergency Water Infrastructure Rebate Scheme. We have cleaned up what has been a mess of the states' making in terms of allowing overruns on that fund—funding which wasn't available. After, I have to say, a lot of toing and froing between ourselves and the states and territories, we have delivered another $50 million. So that's $100 million that is going towards that program.

I want to call out the agriculture minister for New South Wales, who, I have to say, was more interested in playing politics than in actually delivering on this fund. We have delivered. It was the influence and the advocacy of people like the member for Calare, the member for Cowper, the member for New England and, of course, the member for Parkes, and others, who ensured that this money was made available to clean up what was literally an overrun of some thousands, in terms of the farmers across the country who made decisions for which they should have expected support. That support is now being provided but us. We continue to build confidence. We continue to build transparency. We continue to provide information to those communities across the Murray-Darling Basin, because that trust, that transparency and that confidence is critical to ensuring that we can continue to work with those communities and deliver what they expect from us.

Terri Butler (Griffith, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for the Environment and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On the 150 gigalitres expected to be delivered by those off-farm infrastructure measures, it would be appreciated if the minister could provide a breakdown of where it is anticipated they will come from. The minister, I know, had some comments to make about the report that was jointly produced by the Conservation Council of South Australia and the Australia Institute recently. That report said that only three of the identified projects had specified water recovery amounts attached to them, so I think Australians would be very pleased to understand where the 150-gigalitre figure is coming from for off-farm efficiency processes.

I'd also really appreciate the minister providing an update on the $40 million that was allocated for Aboriginal cultural water entitlements in the basin. That was part of the 2018 agreement that was reached in respect of a number of measures in the basin. I know the minister would be aware that there has been some growing criticism of the government in respect of the delay in the provision of those Aboriginal water entitlements. I think we'd benefit quite significantly from being able to hear from the minister on progress in respect of those Aboriginal water entitlements, because, of course, there are many important uses for water in the Murray-Darling Basin and cultural use is one of those really significant uses. With so many Aboriginal nations in the basin, I know that Australians would be very interested in this question.

I want to turn to the question of integrity and ethics in the basin. It has been a couple of years now since the Morrison government first announced that there would be an inspector-general of the Murray-Darling Basin. We had an interim one appointed. His appointment came and went. Then there was a lacuna. Then there was another interim one. He's still there. I am pleased to see that the government has brought forward the legislation to give a statutory underpinning for the role. I have a really simple question for the minister: given that that legislation can't commence on its own terms until all of the basin states have provided their approval for the amending provisions, can the minister update the parliament as to when he anticipates that legislation will commence?

Also, I'd like to ask the minister about a particular water buyback. The minister mentioned water buybacks yesterday in the parliament. Of course, Australia's most famous buybacks were two purchases of overland flow water licences from two properties, Kia Ora and Clyde, for an amount in the vicinity of $80 million. Those properties had been owned by a firm called Eastern Australia Agricultural Pty Ltd, the ultimate parent entity and ultimate controlling entity of which was Eastern Australia Irrigation Ltd, which was based in the Cayman Islands, a known tax haven. One of the founders of that company is someone who's now a minister in the Morrison government. Obviously, he has made clear that he no longer has an interest in that Cayman Island entity, but Australians, I think, are still interested in this particular buyback, particularly given the valuer, Colliers International, has informed the Australian National Audit Office that it does not consider the application of the premium referred to in their valuation report, to the range provided, to be reasonable.

The minister would also be aware of the Guardian article, '$13m mistake: valuer says $80m water buyback price was not in line with its advice'. I understand that the department has said that they are now undertaking to review the material available to them at the time which supported their decision to pay that $80 million price. They were going to review that material and the basis for relying on those particular components of the valuer's report. The question, really, is: can the minister give us an update of the work that the department said they were going to do in reviewing the government's decision-making in respect of that $80 million buyback? There were two buybacks, but we can talk about them collectively, as one set of buybacks. Could the minister tell us whether the department has proceeded and what the progress has been?

Proposed expenditure agreed to.

Debate adjourned.

Federation Chamber adjourned at 13:00