House debates

Tuesday, 30 May 2023

Questions without Notice

National Reconstruction Fund

3:07 pm

Photo of Darren ChesterDarren Chester (Gippsland, National Party, Shadow Minister for Regional Education) Share this | | Hansard source

My question is to the Prime Minister. I refer to the Prime Minister's previous answer, where he continues to mislead native hardwood timber workers and their families and suggests they will share in the National Reconstruction Fund. Prime Minister, that's not true, is it?

Photo of Anthony AlbaneseAnthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | | Hansard source

I thank the member for his question, and I say to the member—you don't get to verbal someone through a question—that this is directly what I said. Here is the House of Representatives Hansard from last Thursday. This is what I said:

That's why we, the Commonwealth government, are investing $300 million to grow plantations, modernise our timber manufacturing infrastructure and build the skills of our forestry workforce.

Tick!

I note that through the National Reconstruction Fund we specifically set aside funding to support the forestry industry.

Tick! But the member for Gippsland voted against it, and everyone here voted against it as well—tick; tick. That is what I said last Thursday, and the member came to this dispatch box and pretended that I said something else. That is the Hansard from last Thursday. I stand by those comments and I stand by the National Reconstruction Fund. I stand by the $15 billion for manufacturing. I stand by the $3 billion for renewables and low-emissions technologies. I stand by the $1½ billion for medical manufacturing. I stand by the billion dollars for value adding—

Photo of Milton DickMilton Dick (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

The Prime Minister will pause for a moment. The member for Gippsland on a point of order?

Photo of Darren ChesterDarren Chester (Gippsland, National Party, Shadow Minister for Regional Education) Share this | | Hansard source

The point of order is on relevance. I did invite the Prime Minister to address his comments towards the native hardwood timber industry. He doesn't seem to understand—

Photo of Milton DickMilton Dick (Speaker) Share this | | Hansard source

Order! Resume your seat. No. That is an abuse of standing orders. You asked a question about the Prime Minister's comments in the parliament. He referred directly to those and quoted his own words regarding the question. He cannot be more relevant. If you're asking a question about his words and he says. 'This is what I said' and quotes it to the parliament, obviously that's being relevant to the question. The question was about the National Reconstruction Fund. He's moving to that part of the question now. He's of course being relevant. So, no more points of order about relevance. I give the Prime Minister the call.

Photo of Anthony AlbaneseAnthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Prime Minister) Share this | | Hansard source

I stand by the fact that we're providing $1 billion for critical technologies. I stand by the fact that $1 billion will be provided for advanced manufacturing and $500 million will be provided for value-adding in agriculture, forestry, fisheries, food and fibre. I stand by all of that. And I stand by my comment that those opposite voted against every one of those funds. Unfortunately for the member for Gippsland, who I have respect for—he's been here a long time—there's this thing called Hansard and it records what you say. So if you're going to come to the dispatch box and make an allegation that there's been some misleading of parliament, which he did in a question, you don't get to put your own words into my mouth. What you get to do is ask a question and I get to answer it. I answered it very clearly. I answered it completely accurately. If the member doesn't understand that there's a link for all the workers throughout the timber industry then I can't help him. He's beyond help.

But the fact is they came here. This is their gotcha moment. This is their big gotcha. The fact is they once again have failed. If he thinks there's been some misleading of parliament, there are appropriate methods for the member to operate— (Time expired)