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

I have received letters from the honourable member for Gippsland and the honourable member for Macnamara proposing that definite matters of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion today. As required by standing order 46, I have selected the matter which, in my opinion, is the most urgent and important—that is, that proposed by the honourable member for Gippsland, namely:

The Government's failure to respect regional Australian families dealing with a cost of living crisis by its plans to increase the cost of the most popular vehicles and cut funding for regional infrastructure projects.

I therefore call upon those honourable members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

Darren Chester (Gippsland, National Party, Shadow Minister for Regional Education) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Speaker, you would be familiar with an old story about a dog that waits every morning to chase a car, and every day that car goes by, the dog chases it and races out, barking furiously, as it goes past. This goes on for weeks, months. It maybe even goes on for nine years. Then one day the dog actually catches the car, and he looks around. He has the car in his mouth, but he doesn't know what to do with it now. That old story is a metaphor for this government. This Prime Minister and this cabinet are the dog that caught the car. They barked, they yapped and they carried on for years about everything they would do one day, and then they won government and had no idea what to do next.

Every day in government is an opportunity to improve the lives of all Australians, which is why Australians are so appalled by this government's divided and distracted approach—a government that completely wasted its first 18 months pursuing a deeply flawed Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice proposal that was never a priority for the majority of Australians. Even today, when the Prime Minister stood at the dispatch box and ran through his supposed achievements, there was not one mention of the word 'Voice'. There was not one mention of the very issue he spent 18 months and hundreds of millions of dollars pursuing. But now they have a new No. 1 priority, and judging by the talking points being regurgitated every day by those opposite they have finally discovered a cost-of-living crisis. They've finally bumped into it.

Now, there are a lot of things in the world that can spin. A Ferris wheel can spin. Carousels, windmills—they'll spin. Planets are all spinning around. But the Minister for Climate Change and Energy is the biggest spinner our nation has seen since the late great Shane Warne. This minister is spinning harder than a redhead on a skid pan. He just won't be honest with Australians. He can't be honest when it comes to telling the truth to the Australian public about his plan to introduce fuel efficiency standards, which will drive up the cost of Australia's favourite cars.

Surely Australians have a right to know what the impacts will be from Labor's plan to introduce a new tax on family cars and utes. Surely Australian business owners have a right to know—like Anthony, a multigeneration car dealer in my electorate, who wrote to me in relation to this government's plan for new vehicle efficiency standards. Anthony said in his email: 'This proposal further unfairly disadvantages small rural and regional communities when compared to our metro counterparts due to the vehicle mix. I can't see our customers magically thinking a Yaris or Corolla will be a substitute for their Prado LandCruiser or HiLux.'

On Anthony's estimates, some of the most popular Toyotas that he sells through his yard will cost his customers more than $10,000 extra under this disastrous plan by the minister for climate change. And who are these customers? They're farmers. They are tradespeople. They're small-business owners. Some of them are grey nomads, travelling around, exploring our beautiful country. But the biggest group of all is everyday Australian families, who need their SUVs and larger vehicles, particularly in our regional communities.

For the life of me I can't understand why, if the minister is so confident about his policy, if he's so adamant he's on the right track, if he's so sure of himself—because he doesn't lack self-confidence, it's fair to say—this minister won't just come to the dispatch box and be honest with all Australians who are worried that they will have to pay more when they purchase a new vehicle in the future. In the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, why do the Prime Minister and his cabinet colleagues think it's a good idea to increase the prices of our highest selling vehicles?

This Prime Minister made quite a fuss during the election campaign about what he said would be a new, open and transparent government under his leadership.

An opposition member: His word is his bond.

His word is his bond, I'm reminded by my colleagues. So why won't the Prime Minister order the minister for climate change to simply release the economic modelling regarding the increased cost to purchase Australia's favourite cars under his government's fuel efficiency standard? Surely the Prime Minister understands that hiding the modelling makes the Australian public feel they are being misled.

There are those opposite who, when I've raised this topic before, have laughed and tried to comfort themselves a little bit that this is a coalition scare campaign. I say to those opposite: if that's the way you feel, if that helps you sleep at night, that's good for you, and keep thinking like that, because the member for McMahon, the minister for climate change, is really only famous for one quote in his entire political career. The member for McMahon said, in the lead-up to the 2019 election—he was bold, he was upfront—to Australians: 'If you don't like our policies, don't vote for us.' And the Australian people warmly welcomed his advice.

Let me assure those opposite who are new to this place: you have every chance in the world of becoming a one-term member of parliament if you back this minister's extreme plan to increase the cost of SUVs, people movers and other vehicles. Families who are struggling with the increased cost of living don't like this policy and they don't like the extreme direction the minister is taking our nation in.

I am concerned that the Prime Minister and the minister are simply hiding the truth from the Australian people, from the Australian motoring community, when it comes to this policy. But perhaps the worst aspect of the policy is the way it was designed—in fact, it actively discriminates against and targets our regional Australian communities and their way of life, because it is regional Australians who are more likely to purchase those larger vehicles—because of the nature of our roads in our regional communities, because of the likelihood we'll be towing boats or caravans or trailers or horse floats and because of the range that we can achieve with a single tank of fuel with those vehicles. Obviously it can be a long way between fuel stations in regional communities, but it's even further between electric charging points.

Why would we on this side actually be surprised, though, that this government, the Albanese government, is targeting regional Australians? It's been the pattern of behaviour throughout the last 22 months. This is a government that has abolished regional grants programs, has cut regional transport projects and has failed to fund further rounds of some of the most successful programs initiated by the previous coalition government—just because it wasn't their idea.

If you see a crane, a bulldozer or a grader working on a major project anywhere in regional Australia today, I can assure you of one thing: this minister, the minister for infrastructure and transport, had nothing to do with it whatsoever. After almost two years, we're still waiting for this minister to deliver a single project—to even announce a single project—under her Growing Regions fund. The minister hasn't started work on a single project of her own, but she has led a conga line of hypocrisy, parading through regional Australia—ministers, senators out there taking credit for projects they'd had nothing to do with; they were out there wandering around. They come in here and they spout their lines about a decade of inaction, but then they rush out to cut the ribbons, rush out to unveil the plaques and the projects that were fully funded by the previous government. The member for Barker and I well know that the most dangerous place to stand in Australia today is between a Labor minister and a ribbon-cutting event! It is a terrifying place to be, particularly when they had absolutely nothing to do with delivering the project in the first place.

The hypocrisy of those opposite, in failing to deliver regional infrastructure, is most obvious in two particular funding programs: the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program and the Stronger Communities Program. If you look on their Facebook pages and Instagram—and the minister for local government is one of the repeat offenders; if you look on her social media, you will find plain examples of taking great credit for the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program and the Stronger Communities Program. They love these coalition programs—so much that they cut them both. This government have also cut the Roads of Strategic Importance Program, the Regional Airports Program and the Building Better Regions Fund—and they wonder why we think they've got it in for regional Australia.

This is a dog of a government. This is a government that is pursuing extreme policies which hurt regional Australian families. Sadly, right in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, this government is determined to put more pressure on our household budgets. This government is putting more pressure on volunteers to fundraise for local projects because it doesn't respect regional Australians. This government simply doesn't trust our local communities to make good decisions with their own money.

Kristy McBain (Eden-Monaro, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Regional Development, Local Government and Territories) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What a 10 minutes of bile that was, but thank you very much; we've heard it all before. For us, regional Australia is much more than just a grants program and much more than just a press release or a six-second radio grab; it's about actually getting on and delivering for them, which those opposite failed to do. There were plenty of press releases adding more projects to the infrastructure pipeline but not adding a single dollar to allow any of those projects to actually proceed. That is classic coalition politics. It is: 'Hey, here's a press release. I might deliver this at some point 30 years into the future, but I'm not actually going to do anything about it now because I just want to issue this press release 10 times over.'

From day one we have been getting on with the job of delivering for regional Australia, and we've delivered more in 18 months then those did in 10 years. We're focused on reducing the cost of living for regional Australians, and we take a strategic whole-of-government approach to uplift in our regions, which, as I said, deserve much more than just a short-lived grant program and much more than a colour-coded spreadsheet. We've implemented the Regional Investment Framework, a strategic approach to investing in people, places, the services our communities need and the industries that underpin our local communities.

We're giving regional Australians more choice of cars that are cleaner and cheaper to run, through the new vehicle efficiency standard. You can choose the vehicle that is right for you and your family, and you will have more options on vehicles that use less fuel. You keep more of what you earn, and it's good for the environment. We've announced a preferred option, and we've been consulting with the industry and the community to get the balance right. At the moment, Australian families are paying $5,000 a year in fuel bills, and they don't need to be. Transport and fuel costs are a big proportion of the average household budget. We can and should give households more choice to bring those costs down, and that's exactly what efficiency standards do. Less choice costs households.

Australians have wasted $4 billion unnecessarily on fuel because the Liberal and National parties didn't have the courage to stick to their own policy they wanted to introduce in 2016. That's billions of dollars a year that could have been and should have been in the pockets of Australian motorists. They were wrong to abandon their own policy from 2016, and they are wrong today to engage in a pathetic scare campaign against a policy that they promoted and embraced just a few years ago. The fuel bill on that inaction is adding up every day. Without standards in place, Australians could waste another $12 billion on fuel costs between now and 2030. Those opposite need to explain why they are spending more time spreading disinformation for the sake of it rather than finding tangible and practical solutions for long-term cost-of-living relief.

The Albanese government is charging up electric vehicles and associated infrastructure, with a $76 million funding package for electric vehicle projects to get more Australians into cleaner and cheaper vehicles to run. Some of those opposite appears so allergic to EVs that they once cried they would be the end of the weekend. But, contrary to scare campaigns, motorists are charging their EVs all along the Hume Highway between Sydney and Melbourne. In Yass, in my own electorate, there are 12 new Tesla EV chargers up and running in the centre of town, where visitors can now charge their cars while they support the Yass community in cafes, restaurants and shops. That trend will continue as EV charging networks expand and as more and more people switch to EVs, hybrids or more fuel-efficient vehicles.

Real-world evidence from other countries with vehicle efficiency standards does not show that standards increase vehicle prices. The Liberals came to that same conclusion when they were in government, when they were talking about what we are talking about right now. The Liberals and the Nationals need to be honest and say why they don't want Australians to have more choices to spend less on fuel. And while they're looking up the evidence on vehicle efficiency standards perhaps they should also look at the evidence on what we've been investing in regional infrastructure: 57 per cent of major projects we're investing in under the Infrastructure Investment Program are in regional areas.

When we came to government we faced hundreds of projects, as I said, that were promised to communities in press releases but never costed and never planned for—projects like the replacement of the 60-year-old Sarsfield hall, an essential refuge for the community during the 2019-20 Black Summer bushfires. Like so many communities, this community was left in limbo by the member for Gippsland and the former Deputy Prime Minister, the member for New England. But it was really great when I got to go out there and say: 'Do you know what? We've locked in $3.6 million in funding for you, because we don't want to leave you up the creek.'

Under the previous government entire regions were ignored, particularly when it came to disaster preparedness and recovery and to communications and training, because it didn't suit their electoral map. Grant programs weren't transparent, and resource constrained organisations wasted time on applications that never stood a chance—something we felt deeply across Eden-Monaro and across a number of regional electorates on this side of the House and on the crossbench.

In contrast, we've doubled Roads to Recovery from $500 million to $1 billion per year—no colour coded spreadsheet required! Every local council in the country will get an increase in road funding, because every local council in the country knows how important it is to have safe and maintained local roads to get kids to school, to go to work and to go to sporting events. We've increased road black spot funding from $110 million a year to $150 million a year, and we've created the new $200 million per year Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program. Those opposite were so excited about that announcement that we heard zero on it! So in 10 years they talked about how important road funding was, but not once could they get out of their own way and actually give that to local communities.

On Local Roads and Community Infrastructure, you could have done Roads to Recovery for every local council across the country—doesn't require a colour coded spreadsheet! That means every local community benefits. Unfortunately, when you were in government you did zero.

That's because we're doing it! On Local Roads and Community Infrastructure, we put an additional $252 million in. And do you know what we did? We said in phase 4A that we know regional communities are doing it tough so we will give the majority of the funding to them—again, no coloured spreadsheet required! We listen to local communities, and we're delivering for them. We know they've been impacted by natural disasters, so we proactively advanced nearly $1.8 billion in disaster payments to fast-track essential road repair and public asset repair. Most importantly for communities, we've established transparent funding opportunities, as we said we would, including the $600 million Growing Regions Program and the $400 million Regional Precincts and Partnerships Program.

Regional people want to see delivery in their communities, which is why the Albanese Labor government will continue to deliver the infrastructure, the skills, the jobs and the services that stimulate regional economies and build thriving communities. In addition to the roads and other infrastructure we've talked about, we're narrowing the connectivity divide between rural and remote Australians and our metro counterparts. We've followed through on our commitment to improve mobile coverage in priority areas, with $37.2 million supporting 41 new mobile phone base stations, mostly in our regions.

Over the last decade, half of some streets and entire regional towns missed out on high-speed internet, which crippled businesses, remote work and study, and access to key services. That's why we've made the largest investments in connectivity since the introduction of the NBN—under a Labor government—with an additional $2.4 billion for expanding full-fibre NBN to over 660,000 regional premises. An additional $170.2 million is supporting communications upgrades to mobile coverage, public wi-fi and fibre at over 100 regional locations—because, in 2024, connectivity is not a 'nice to have'; it is an absolute necessity.

On this side of the House, we don't pretend we can solve every issue overnight, but we have been working hard to establish practical solutions which activate regional development and economic decentralisation. We are addressing chronic regional underemployment and unlocking secure well-paid jobs through our $15 billion National Reconstruction Fund. We know we can diversify regional economies by kick-starting innovative projects in agriculture, AI, science and transport. We are also investing 47 new rural and remote community childcare services, supporting more people to return to work. On this side of the House, we believe in delivering for regional Australia. We don't issue press releases for the sake of it and we don't carp on as if we didn't have 10 years in government to do more.

Kevin Hogan (Page, National Party, Shadow Minister for Trade and Tourism) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Gippsland for his MPI today. There are two issues that he has brought up in this MPI: the ute-and-car tax and the infrastructure vacuum that is now left in regional communities. There are two ministers involved in those two issues. I'm going to talk first about the Minister for Climate Change and Energy.

I would say to the backbenchers over there—especially the first-term backbenchers—that there is one minister I would be very nervous about if I were you: the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. If there was one minister that would potentially make you one-termers—and there are quite a few in competition for that role—it would be the Minister for Climate Change and Energy. Let's face it; that minister has form. If the issues weren't so serious, you could almost say he was a walking gift for the opposition, because this guy has form in making a mess of what he touches.

Let's go way back. I remember when he was the minister for immigration, and what a sad record he had as the minister for immigration. It was a sad record because it was a tragic record. There were the boats that came and the unfortunate deaths at sea. If you look at the statistics, it was worst when he was minister for immigration. So his dysfunction as a minister goes way back.

The member for Gippsland also raised the point that, when the Minister for Climate Change and Energy was shadow Treasurer and he was trying to bring in the changes to franking credits—and a couple of other things that were obviously going to be a disaster for the economy—he quite bravely and quite honestly gave the great advice of: 'If you don't like the policy that I am trying to bring in, don't vote for us.' And they didn't. So a great record there! Now he is the Minister for Climate Change and Energy.

What is he doing now that would make me very nervous if I were a backbencher in his government? Well, there are quite a few things, but let's start with the ute tax the member for Gippsland mentioned. I didn't make up these figures about the increase in the prices of utes and SUVs. These figures weren't made up by the member for Gippsland. These figures are coming from the car manufacturers—Toyota, Isuzu. I met a number of the manufacturers. This is them telling us that this is what is going to happen.

He hasn't showed us the modelling. I don't know if he showed you, but I would be asking him, 'How have you worked this out?' You can go to the car manufacturers and they will tell you why they think this is going to happen. They are saying that the implementation is too quick, that they won't meet what he wants them to meet and that, therefore, the fines or penalties will be passed on. And it's not just the car manufacturers. We import a lot of our cars from Thailand. When the Prime Minister of Thailand was in Melbourne at ASEAN, he said that the price of cars that they make and that they send to this country are going up. It's not me, and it's not the member for Gippsland. That is the Prime Minister of Thailand who said the price of what is sent to Australia and that we manufacture here in Australia is going up because of what this minister is doing. So first-termers, backbenchers, be very, very nervous about your Minister for Climate Change and Energy. He has form.

Let's go on to a couple of the other things he's responsible for. Some people have referred to him as 'Blackout Bowen'. Why have they referred to him as 'Blackout Bowen'? Because of his aggressive—I withdraw. Why do they say that? Again, the aggressiveness of the renewable energy targets he has set by 2030. We all like renewables, but there are technological issues with them about covering that percentage of the baseload. So, again, there's a disaster coming near you, and a lot of the time it's going to be caused by the Minister for Climate Change and Energy.

I will touch briefly on infrastructure. Again, if there were a prize for the person who is the biggest danger in your government, the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government would probably be in the top three most days. People in my community often come up to me now and say, 'I always get more motivated about politics when a Labor government comes in,' because they realise what a disaster they are, especially for regional Australia.

The member for Gippsland raised a couple of programs. My favourite—I don't know if he mentioned it—is the Stronger Communities Program. I think he did. It is a great program. None of you stood up for that. Shame on you for not doing that, because it was a great infrastructure program.

Meryl Swanson (Paterson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

One of the best days in any young person's life is the day they get their P plates.

Hon. Members:

Honourable members interjecting—

Meryl Swanson (Paterson, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I know, and many members around me will recall that day. That is particularly so for kids who live in regional areas, where often there is not a lot of public transport. That is often the best day for their parents too, because they're not schlepping kids around as much as they previously had to, although on the odd occasion they are up at 2 am watching the clock and hoping that that P-plater will be home soon.

This government has thought a lot about those children, and it's interesting. I was having a look at some stats. Twenty per cent of my electorate in 2021, according to the census in that year, were aged 14 years or under. Those 14-year-olds now are turning 17 and getting their P-plates, and congratulations to them. In the coming years, they'll be buying vehicles, and I want those children to have the choice to buy vehicles that don't use as much fuel. If you're 17, you're probably not watching this, but your mum and dad might be, and they want you to spend less on fuel as well. That's what this New Vehicle Efficiency Standard is about. It is making cars more fuel efficient. Let me ask you: why should any Australian, regardless of whether they live in a regional area or smack bang in a city, be buying a car that is substandard and that the rest of the world, quite frankly, don't get and don't want? Russia and Australia—there we go—are the top two, the top of the pops for fuel inefficiency in the world. We're going to change that. The Albanese government is going to deliver more fuel-efficient cars for our regions so that our young people and parents will have choice in the future. Families are currently spending around $5,000 a year on fuel. We want that to come down, and we're going to be doing something about it.

With fuel efficiency comes air quality. We want cars to be cheaper and cleaner, and so do our young people, and we are backing them in. We are literally putting the rubber on the road when it comes to delivering better-quality cars for all Australians. The other thing about living in the regions is roads. Everyone talks about—

Yes, we lay rubber on the roads in my electorate. I know young people who do that. I'm not suggesting they should, but I know that some of them do. But do you know what? The other thing is roads. It is so important, and I have never been prouder to be part of a government that is delivering real infrastructure, not just paving the way with press releases making a promise here and a promise there that, in the never-never, you might get something. We are delivering.

In my electorate alone, at the moment we have $3.5 billion, with a b, worth of projects on the books being delivered. We are extending the M1, fixing that last chokepoint between Sydney and Brisbane. We're spending $2.3 billion on that. The road is being delivered right now. It is being built. We are widening the Hexham Straight where the member for Newcastle's electorate and my electorate meet up, and what a magnificent place Hexham is. We're delivering that road. We're doing the Newcastle Inner City Bypass. We have the Singleton Bypass and the Muswellbrook Bypass coming in the future. These are roads that we're delivering today and that Australians are going to be driving on in more fuel-efficient cars. Not only are we delivering these roads; we are also making it safer and we are also making it cheaper.

The other part of this is telecommunications. We talk about connectivity and moving around. We know that fuel, cars and roads are important, but today telecommunications is pretty much the highway of the future—and everyone knows it. We're not spinning copper to go around the country, like this mob were for 10 years, spinning their wheels, doing nothing. We're delivering fibre, we are delivering better communications in our regions and we know that these are the two most important points of connectivity.

I say to those opposite: you had 10 years, you did seven-eighths of not much and now you've had to stand aside for a government that is actually delivering for Australians and that takes Australians' safety, health and hip pocket seriously. I've never been prouder to be part of a government that does that, not only for regional Australians but for all Australians. We are delivering the infrastructure, the roads, the cheaper fuel and the more efficient cars for everyone. I say, Australia, you're moving forward under an Albanese government.

Michelle Landry (Capricornia, National Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Manufacturing) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Today I rise to shed light on a matter of utmost importance: the neglect of regional communities by the Labor government. It is vital that we address the significant impacts of the government's action on regional infrastructure programs, which have been the lifelines of our regional areas for far too long. This government's decisions have wielded a heavy axe upon regional programs aimed at fostering growth and opportunities for our regional communities. In their inaugural budget, Labor shockingly slashed a staggering $10 billion from regional programs, delivering a severe blow to the prospects of regional development.

Let us examine the consequences of their actions. The list of abolished programs reads like a catalogue of missed opportunities. The Building Better Regions Fund, the Community Development Grants Program, the Regionalisation Fund, the Regional Accelerator Program and the Energy Security and Regional Development Plan were all eliminated without regard for the aspirations of regional Australians. Moreover, crucial coalition programs left in limbo by Labor's inaction include the Regional Airports Program, the Regional Airport Security Screening Fund, the Local Roads and Community Infrastructure Program, beyond phase 4, and the Stronger Communities Program. These programs, which were instrumental in enhancing regional connectivity and resilience, now languish without extension or support.

Furthermore, the Labor government's review of infrastructure programs has resulted in further devastation for Capricornia. They have axed vital initiatives, such as the dedicated Bridges Renewal Program, the Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program and the Roads of Strategic Importance program, undermining the very foundations of regional development. These initiatives have contributed to safe roads for residents of Capricornia. One example is the sealing of 40 kilometres of Stanage Bay Road. This road holds vital significance, not only serving the local community but also ensuring the safe transit of military personnel to and from Shoalwater Bay.

The absence of concrete alternatives exasperates the situation. Despite promises, Labor have failed to provide adequate replacements for the successful coalition programs they have abolished. Projects like the Regional Precincts and Partnerships Program and the Growing Regions Program remain stalled, leaving regional communities stranded in a state of uncertainty and neglect. Projects within my electorate of Capricornia, which were fully funded and poised for implementation, have encountered significant delays and the looming threat of cancellation.

Together with my colleagues in the Rockhampton community, I staunchly advocated to safeguard the Rockhampton Ring Road project from being sacrificed, with its funding potentially redirected towards inner-city projects that have incurred substantial cost overruns amounting to billions of dollars. Another critical regional project, the Phillips Creek Bridge, situated near the mining community of Dysart, faced peril during Labor's infrastructure review. It is inconceivable that this government would jeopardise essential projects like the Phillips Creek Bridge which could undoubtably save lives by enhancing commuter safety.

Instead, they appear content to manipulate funding allocations, diverting resources away from regional initiatives to bolster projects within urban centres. Despite their relentless program cuts and funding setbacks, this government shamelessly dispatches its ministers to bask in the limelight and ceremoniously open projects that were fully funded and successfully executed under the former coalition government. The sheer irony of this situation is utterly staggering.

Evidence presented during Senate estimates in February paints a damning picture of Labor's incompetence. Nearly two years into office, hundreds of promised projects lay dormant, with over $1 billion of allocated funds sitting idle, while 271 out of 458 projects were not yet active. This inaction is not just disappointing; it is a betrayal of the trust placed in the government by regional Australians.

The repercussions of these decisions reverberate far beyond budgetary allocations. Labor's funding cuts for regional infrastructure projects by 30 per cent and insistence on a fifty-fifty funding split with states spells disaster for regional development. This departure from the former 80-20 model jeopardises much-needed upgrades to regional roads, impeding economic growth and endangering lives.

Let us not forget the human cost of these decisions. Reduced productivity, limited access to services and increased safety risks weigh heavily on the shoulders of regional Australians. The Labor government's neglect of regional infrastructure is not just a policy failure; it is a betrayal of trust and a disregard for the wellbeing of Capricornians.

Brian Mitchell (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm pleased the member for Gippsland is here—just before he departs the chamber—because he mentioned that the government is like the dog that chases the car. Well, I've got another dog story for him. That's of the dog that returns to its own vomit, and that's the National Party and the Liberal Party writ large. There's nothing they like more than returning to the vomit of a good scare campaign. We all remember, on this side of the House, the '$100 lamb roast' and, of course, the 'end of the weekend'. Just a few weeks ago, those on the front bench opposite were talking about Marxist tax cuts, which they then quietly voted for. The fact is that the whole premise of this—

Sam Birrell (Nicholls, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I raise a point of order on an unparliamentary remark. I think to call anyone's political party 'vomit' is beyond the pale and I think it should be withdrawn.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You can sit down. I allowed some very questionable comments referring to dogs a little while ago. I'm not happy about it, from either side, but it is not unparliamentary. I listened very carefully to what he said, as I listened very carefully to what the member for Page and the member for Gippsland said. Believe me, if they had crossed that line, I would have pulled them all up. I do, however, ask people to be respectful in their debates in this House on all sides.

Brian Mitchell (Lyons, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. The whole premise of this matter of public importance is ridiculous. It is ridiculous for those opposite to suggest that this government has in any way failed to respect Australian families who are dealing with the cost-of-living crisis. The Albanese government is rolling out billions of dollars of cost-of-living measures which are going to precisely help regional families—measures like cheaper medicines, increasing Medicare bulk billing, cheaper child care, expanding paid parental leave, boosting income support payments, fee-free TAFE and getting wages moving again, not to mention that from 1 July we are delivering a tax cut for every Australian taxpayer and a bigger tax cut for more workers.

Frankly, the member for Gippsland, in moving this matter of public importance—the vast majority of taxpayers in the member for Gippsland's electorate will be getting a bigger tax cut because of Labor's changes to stage 3, the stage 3 plan that the government he was part of put forward to this parliament.

What I would suggest shows a failure to respect Australian families is, in fact, the opposition leader's scare campaign about the new vehicle efficiency standard. It's a policy that those opposite embraced and promoted when in government, just a few short years ago. This is a policy that will bring down fuel costs and give Australians more choice of cars that are cleaner and cheaper to run.

As the member for a regional electorate, I've got news for those opposite and for members opposite who represent regional electorates. We have people in our electorates who drive a lot of kilometres every year. We're talking about tens of thousands of kilometres—that's a lot of fuel. Getting cheaper fuel is good news for those consumers. But it's the same tactic we see again and again from those opposite: spread the fear, spread the smear and deliver nothing.

It's a similar story in Tasmania. The Liberal government in Tasmania has spent 10 years making promises to Tasmanian families but not keeping them, failing to respect them by consistently overpromising and then failing to deliver. Whether it's housing or whether it's health—no matter what it is—the Liberal government in my state is simply failing to respect regional families, which, of course, is the matter of public importance before us today.

I talk about the long-promised Elizabeth Street bus mall—it never happened, but now the Liberals are promising a Launceston bus mall. The four-lane Midland Highway, which runs through my electorate—it never happened. As to the telecommunications upgrades, long promised, along the Great Eastern Drive: the signs promoting the extra communication, apparently on its way, have rusted out and have been replaced, but there are still no communications from the state government that promised that program. Much-needed drought relief funding for Tasmanian farmers was announced four days before this Saturday's election, not when it was needed.

The fact is that the people of Tasmania have a choice this Saturday: they can either have four more years of a failed Liberal government, or they can elect Rebecca White and the Labor team in Tasmania, who have the right priorities, including housing, health and cost-of-living measures. They are precisely what this Labor government in Canberra is also all about—bringing the cost of living down for Australian families.

Sam Birrell (Nicholls, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm a first-termer, as everyone knows; I've been here not quite two years. People ask me if I'm enjoying myself, and I say: 'Generally, yes. I enjoy the debate, and it's a great honour to represent your people.'

One of the things that I find the most frustrating is the lack of understanding that things are a bit different out in regional Australia, and broad-based policies that treat everyone the same disadvantage regional people. It's really frustrating, because you have a government like the Labor government that just doesn't understand or prioritise regional communities and regional people.

We have seen that in so many ways—firstly, in infrastructure. I listened to the speeches of those opposite. It sounds fantastic. The thing is: we haven't seen any of it roll out. The roads are getting worse. The infrastructure projects aren't being built.

I hear those opposite say, 'In 10 years you did nothing.' Well, for 10 years I wasn't in this place; I was just an ordinary community member in Shepparton, in the Goulburn Valley. I saw so much happen—and not only in my community, which was represented by a National Party member; I saw infrastructure development in the neighbouring electorate of Bendigo that was represented by a Labor member and still is. I saw a terrific grant program help them expand their regional airport, which now links them to Sydney, which is great for Bendigo. It's fantastic. And that was delivered by the coalition government, with the assistance of my predecessor. It was a government that got regional Australia; it was a government that understood that the economic growth is based on agriculture and on manufacturing and it needs infrastructure to thrive.

The member for Gippsland, who proposed this MPI, was the infrastructure minister when the funding was developed for the Echuca-Moama Bridge. Now, that community had all sorts of problems before that: one narrow, not-fit-for-purpose bridge over the Murray River. There's so much agricultural produce that goes from New South Wales to Victoria and vice versa. They needed a second bridge—a second river crossing. The state coalition government developed the program and started it off; the federal government came in with the majority of the money—80 per cent of the funding. All I could see the Victorian Labor government do was cut the ribbon!

Now, this 80-20 split that used to exist in regional development funding was necessary to get these projects off the ground—and it's even more necessary now in Victoria, because, for those Victorians in this chamber, I don't know if you've noticed but the state's finances are not in a good state at all. The Victorian government has not managed Victoria's finances well. That is frightening for future infrastructure projects, especially when it's a 50-50 split, because now the state government can't afford 50 per cent of most of the projects—particularly those in regional Victoria. So we're being dudded on regional infrastructure under this government. There are a lot of announcements, but I don't see anything rolling out.

Then there is the new-car tax. The issue with this is that it's a bit different living in regional areas; sometimes you need different vehicles, and to do the jobs required in regional areas you need, in some cases, diesel vehicles. You need diesel four-wheel drives or utes; that's true for tradies and farmers. I'm a big supporter of people in cities using EVs. If people in country areas want to buy EVs, good. But they're not suitable for a lot of the people living in regional and remote areas. If you impose extra costs on the existing diesel SUVs and utes that those people require, it is a tax because it's forcing them to pay more for, in many cases, a necessary tool of the trade. It's this type of policy that is: 'Well, let's just paint it with a broad brush. If it suits metropolitan areas but duds regional people, well, it's too hard to make any exceptions, and they're only out there in the country, so why bother.' That's what's so frustrating and disappointing about being in this parliament with a Labor government that doesn't get regional communities.

Michelle Ananda-Rajah (Higgins, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

When the free market is allowed to work, the consumer decides. I find it astounding that those opposite, particularly the Nationals, are so out of touch with their regions and their regional consumers. We currently have 180,000 electric vehicles on the road in Australia. Sales are surging, and do you know where the majority of the sales are? This might come as a surprise to the Nationals; the majority of the sales are in outer metropolitan and—wait for it—regional areas. You don't even know what your constituents want!

Australians are voting with their feet, and when it comes to EVs they have put their foot on the pedal and they are flying—away from the Liberals and the Nationals, and their ridiculous juvenile scare campaign. And fly they do; an electric vehicle will leave a V8 for dead. How do I know that? I'm an owner of an electric vehicle; in fact, I have two. I bought one of them before I entered politics. And, you know what: this car has instant power and instant torque. It's fantastic for getting away in those sticky situations when you need to just get out of trouble.

In addition to that, these cars are fun to drive and they have much lower operating costs. My previous conventional vehicle had maintenance costs of four digits and rising. With this vehicle, on the other hand, my maintenance costs came in at three digits. And the best part is that I took the car in, and two hours later the car was ready. Why? Because electric vehicles have far fewer moving parts. A conventional engine will have 2,000 moving parts, and an electric vehicle will have a fraction of that—so they are much easier to service.

What's driving the interest in electric vehicles? Sure, people are interested in climate and the environmental benefits, but what's actually driving this is the economics. People have figured out that having an electric vehicle actually saves you money. Why? Because one in three Australians have rooftop solar; it's a game changer. When you have rooftop solar, you basically harness the power of Aussie sunshine. Your operating costs to run the car are negligible—and that's what I have. My car charges once a week—once a fortnight, sometimes, depending on the range of my rooftop solar—and I just drive past those petrol stations with petrol costs of $1.80, $1.90 or sometimes $2; I just fly past them. Australians are figuring this out, and that's why sales for electric vehicles are surging. When we came to government, sales were at two per cent—moribund. Australia was being left behind by this EV revolution. Last year sales were at eight per cent, and they were at 9.6 per cent in February this year. Sales have taken off, and it is being driven by outer metropolitan consumers and regional customers. Do your research the next time you put forward an MPI, people. Do your research.

In addition to all of this, what are the health benefits? Now, I'm a doctor; I'm particularly invested in the health benefits. Australia has the highest rate of asthma in the world, and that is in large part due to the pollution and the particulate matter in our atmosphere. In reducing transport emissions, we will save 11,000 people from premature deaths. Air pollution is linked to asthma, dementia and cancer.

In addition to this, there is the small matter of climate change, the elephant in the room. In adopting vehicle efficiency standards, we will actually pull 300 million tonnes of carbon from our atmosphere by 2050. That is enormous. If we don't act on transport and if we do not decarbonise transport, which currently accounts for 20 per cent of all our emissions, transport will become the largest source of emissions in Australia. It will leave electricity generation for dead, and that's not what we want.

Tony Pasin (Barker, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Have you eaten another Shmackos?

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You can withdraw that.

Tony Pasin (Barker, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw it.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. I'll have no more of those unparliamentary interjections.

Tony Pasin (Barker, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Some things change, but some things stay the same. It seems that the members for Higgins are always going to try and lecture people who live in regional Australia. So my message to the member for Higgins is that I, if I had an EV like her, wouldn't have to charge it once a week, as she describes it, because I drive 100,000 kilometres a year. There would be absolutely no ability for me to do my job if I were driving an electric vehicle. So, Member for Higgins, before you talk about this policy and how it affects regional Australians, have a think about what regional Australians actually have to do.

Now, I had intended to come in here and talk about some other things, but I've got to address some issues the member for Higgins just raised. She just spoke about how this is a great example of free-market policy operating in the Australian environment. Now, with respect, the Assistant Treasurer here could barely stop from smirking because he knows it's many things, this policy, but it's not an example of the free market in operation. If it were the free market in operation, we wouldn't be asked to consider this particular issue. I appreciate the argument about renewable energies has fallen flat on those opposite—namely, why are we having to continue to subsidise its rollout if it's so cheap? That argument has supposedly been lost on those opposite. But now we've got an example of those opposite saying, 'Why are these neoliberals over there just wanting to get in the way of the free market?' Oh my! I don't know how you could describe asking someone who would like to buy a Land Cruiser to pay for credits that would be provided to another OEM as an example of the free market in operation. It just simply cannot be.

But, ladies and gentlemen, I didn't come here to talk about the member for Higgins. I want to talk about what this is doing to regional Australians. This is a tax on regionality. Why?

Rob Mitchell (McEwen, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Rubbish!

Tony Pasin (Barker, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for McEwen—not sitting in his seat, I note, Madam Deputy Speaker, and you are an exemplar for the rules—says 'rubbish'. I'll take that interjection. Why does he say 'rubbish'? In my electorate, there are almost no EVs. Why? Because they don't suit the needs of the people that live in my electorate. If the member for Higgins were right, and this were just a product of the free market, then, if it suited their needs, there would be a lot of people in my electorate taking up this opportunity. But at the Wagin Woolorama, all the way in Western Australia, I took the opportunity to check in with a Toyota dealer. I said: 'Oh, this new electric Toyota that I've just seen'—which, by the way, proudly puts a sticker on it that says 'carbon emissions: zero'. I don't know what electricity goes in the vehicle that can be completely carbon neutral for all its life, but apparently it will always have renewable energy. I asked, 'For a comparable Toyota, how much less expensive is it if it is an ICE vehicle?'—for those opposite, an internal combustion engine—and it was $30,000. So what those opposite are saying is that $30,000 is the price people should pay for this choice.

The reality is that, even if you bought that $30,000-more-expensive car in my electorate, it couldn't do the things it needs to do. The three most sold vehicles in this country at the moment—the Ford Ranger, the Isuzu D-MAX and the Toyota LandCruiser—are all vehicles that are not going to be serviced by this. This is asking country Peter, who is buying himself a LandCruiser, to pay for city Paul's Tesla. That's what this is, because Teslas will be cheaper.

While I'm talking about Tesla, I note that, while that might not be one of the examples of Chinese made vehicles, the majority of these are. But I will tell you what is made in China: every single one of these batteries. I don't necessarily agree with everything the member for New England says; I agree with a lot of what he says. One thing he says is that our job is to make our country as strong as it can be as quickly as can be. This policy not only makes Australians poorer but weakens Australia and strengthens our No. 1 strategic opponent.

Marion Scrymgour (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I want to talk about some critical issues in my electorate of Lingiari. The member for Barker stands up here and talks about his electorate, and I think people on that side think that they're the only ones who represent regional Australia, when there are many of us on this side who represent regional Australia. I'm proud to represent not only regional areas of the Northern Territory but also very remote areas of the Northern Territory, which you people failed over a decade. Over a decade, you failed to put any investment into the Northern Territory. I am proud to be on this side, which, when we look at energy bills, is making sure that 49,000 householders in the Northern Territory will be eligible for a rebate on their energy bills come 1 July.

We have also looked after aged-care workers. In the Northern Territory, if you believed the people on the other side, particularly Oscar the Grouch, you'd look at the aged-care workers that the Albanese government has—

Tony Pasin (Barker, Liberal Party, Shadow Assistant Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

She doesn't have to withdraw that?

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Lingiari—

Marion Scrymgour (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Barker, can you just try not to tell me how to do my job? I'd like you to withdraw the comment, Member for Lingiari.

Marion Scrymgour (Lingiari, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Deputy Speaker, I withdraw. The Albanese government has provided for a 15 per cent increase in the minimum wage for aged-care workers. For 1,606 Territorians working in aged care, that's great news.

As for regional infrastructure projects, something that was simply missing from those on the other side, I am proud that our government is upgrading seven major highways and roads: the Stuart Highway, the Central Arnhem Highway, the Tanami, the Carpentaria Highway, the Buntine Highway, the Mereenie Loop Road and the Paru Road—a lot of highways and roads. This is providing connectivity for those remote communities. The government is building five new or upgraded health clinics at Mutitjulu, Alice Springs, Santa Teresa and Palmerston. These health clinics certainly weren't supported by the people opposite.

One thing that we need to do for young people is to keep them engaged, and one of the ways of doing that is to build or upgrade sporting facilities. I'm proud that we're going to be delivering 80 new or upgraded sporting facilities, including upgrades to the Katherine pool and the Freds Pass Reserve. Community shade places are often taken for granted, but we are building those in 13 remote Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory. There will be two new cultural centres in Central Australia, including the state-of-the-art National Aboriginal Art Gallery.

On communications, I know one of my colleagues talked about connectivity and just how important it is. There are new builds or upgrades to internet and mobile reception for over 30 different remote communities. There are 75 communities in the Northern Territory. Out of those 75 communities, 30 had no mobile access whatsoever. These are major communities that have populations of over 2½ thousand people, and communication simply wasn't available to those communities.

For Central Australia, there is $48 million under the Central Australian community safety package and a commitment for a further $250 million. That is money that was put back after the coalition government, over 10 years, removed more than $500 million from Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory. It is the Albanese government that has put this investment back on the table to try and deal with some of the intractable issues that we are seeing in those communities. There are 30 different individual programs and infrastructure commitments coming out of those funding commitments.

I want to repeat: this investment in community infrastructure in the Northern Territory and in Lingiari is the largest ever in the history of governments in Australia. I'm proud to be part of this government that has put investment back into those communities in the Northern Territory. It's not just about those mob on the other side. It's about getting services to Aboriginal communities in the Northern Territory.

Sharon Claydon (Newcastle, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time for this discussion has now concluded.