Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. In the May budget, the government has made cuts to infrastructure and referred hundreds of congestion-busting projects to yet another review, yet the government's own budget papers say a further 1.5 million people will come to Australia over five years. Why is this government putting at risk projects like upgrades to the M5 Motorway and the Western Sydney Airport Metro rail?

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister for immigration will cease interjecting.

Government members interjecting —

Order! Members on my right, there is far too much noise. A general warning to members on my right has now been issued. The Prime Minister will be heard in silence.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm asked a question about infrastructure. I'm asked a question, as well, about infrastructure around Badgerys Creek airport, remarkably, from a minister who presided over the purchase of land that had been valued at $3 million for over $30 million. I would have thought that, if there were one word that should never pass that former minister's lips, it is 'Leppington', because Leppington is a great reminder of how hopeless they were in delivering value for money. If you want to look at why you would have a review of projects where they paid more than 10 times as much as land had been valued at, that is a great example.

We on this side of the House, of course, in the budget have our infrastructure commitments that we made, all of which will be delivered. We had, previously, the absurd question about Roads to Recovery—

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The Manager of Opposition Business has asked his question.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

which is funded in the budget in the budget papers. We are a government that have always delivered for local government. We believe, indeed, that local government is best placed to deliver community infrastructure because they can determine what local priorities are. They have proper auditing procedures. It's far better than setting up a committee of a few people sitting around with colour coded spreadsheets deciding where taxpayers' money would be used. That's what they did.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Prime Minister will pause.

The Minister for Home Affairs will cease interjecting, so I can hear from the Manager of Opposition Business on a point of order.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On relevance: the question is about the M5 Motorway and Western Sydney airport metro rail. It was not about local government and local projects. I would have thought this Prime Minister, of all people, should know the difference between local infrastructure and major road and rail projects.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question was also about budget cuts to infrastructure and other projects. I'm listening carefully to the Prime Minister, and I'll make sure he stays relevant to the question.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

These projects are actually under construction. They're funded. The money has been forwarded, of course, our portion, to the New South Wales government for those important projects. But I make this point: when I became infrastructure minister I inherited 12 years of the Howard government. It's really easy to recognise the big change that occurred, which was: instead of $0 being spent for not a single urban rail project anywhere in Australia over 12 years, we increased rail funding by more than 10 times. I make this point about their performance on infrastructure: Inland Rail, originally costed at under $10 billion, has been costed at $31 billion, without going to a port anywhere—literally inland! It won't deliver anything to a port. (Time expired)