Allegra Spender (Wentworth, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise in support of the member for Wentworth's motion urging the government to commit to a better, more transparent and responsive approach to infrastructure projects. This motion goes to two fundamental reforms about infrastructure: how we select big infrastructure projects and when we undertake them.

Big infrastructure projects can be a useful economic management tool. In response to the COVID-19 economic downturn, the federal government made substantial commitments to infrastructure developments, as did state territory governments. In theory, this was consistent with sound economic policy. When the economy is weak, that's the right time to stimulate it with big projects. But the Australian economy recovered far more quickly than expected. This was obviously good news, but, when it did, we didn't adjust the infrastructure decisions accordingly. So our current high-level infrastructure spending is in fact driving prices up. The 10-year $120-billion infrastructure investment pipeline is now crowding out private sector investment. Multiple recent independent reviews have shown this. Big public projects should be timed to fill the troughs in the economic cycle rather than compete during construction-sector peaks.

Last year's independent review of the Infrastructure Investment Program showed $33 billion in additional known cost pressures as a result of a clogged infrastructure pipeline. This is currently particularly painful because we desperately need to build more homes and we need the people and materials to build them. At the moment, the housing sector, the mining sector—particularly in WA—and the clean energy sector are competing with large-scale infrastructure projects for construction-sector workers. While not all trades and skills are transferable between sectors, many are, and current strong employment conditions make it harder to expand the domestic construction workforce. Something's got to give. Some of the $120 billion of committed infrastructure projects should wait so that we can build the homes we need.

Prioritising and scaling back infrastructure spending until we have sufficient resources of both labour and materials to meet demand would stop pushing up prices for labour and materials and contribute to lowering inflation. It would mean that the most critical projects could be completed in shorter timeframes with less pressure on costs, and it would reduce pressure on the housing sector and stop crowding out private-sector spending.

But how would we prioritise infrastructure projects? Which are the best projects? These questions lead to the other big change proposed in this motion.

I was absolutely floored when I found out that big infrastructure projects don't have to have a business case. That's right: government can commit to spending hundreds of millions—even billions—of dollars without proving that the project is needed, that it will deliver benefits or that it's worth doing. Coming from the private sector, this is astounding. You can't spend shareholder money without justifying it. But, when it comes to taxpayer money, if it's popular, or the party in government at the moment wants it, that's good enough, even if it makes no actual sense. Governments should have to explain to the public: 'Why are we doing this? What outcomes do we hope to achieve? How will we know if we've achieved these outcomes? Do the numbers stack up?' Robust business cases should be required for all infrastructure projects and made public to allow for scrutiny and community oversight. An amendment to this effect was proposed by the member for Wentworth, which I backed, just for projects over $100 million, and it was rejected by both the major parties, who ultimately don't want the headache of actual accountability when they are in government. Also, after projects have been delivered, they should have to be evaluated. Can you believe they don't have to be? We never find out if a project actually achieved its goals.

There's too little accountability when it comes to spending our money. If governments are spending taxpayer money, they should have to spend it well and spend it at the right time. We must focus on investments that improve the productive capacity of our economy and contribute to explicitly stated long-term goals, whether economic or social or environmental. This is particularly important now, in an environment of high inflation, with pressure on the budget in the medium to long term. I urge the government to respond to the two independent inquiries calling for better processes for infrastructure decisions—to do what any company must do, and actually have a defensible business case for spending taxpayer money on infrastructure, and to pause non-essential infrastructure for now so that we can build the homes that we need. We urgently need better transparency and accountability in our infrastructure projects.

Steve Georganas (Adelaide, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Albanese Labor government has reformed Australia's infrastructure pipeline, ensuring our investments in the nation's infrastructure grow, so that the economy improves in productivity and takes pressure off inflation. We all know that infrastructure projects, whether they be bridges, roads or other types of projects, are an important part of assisting and enhancing our communities. Infrastructure grows the economy and ensures positions and jobs for workers. It enhances the economy of a particular area.

I'm very proud to have currently in my electorate three major infrastructure projects—and many, many more, but I'll speak about three of them today. The first is the North-South Corridor, the Torrens to Darlington project, which was announced back in 2013. I was there for the first sod turning when the current Prime Minister was then the transport minister. This $15.4 billion project goes straight through my electorate, through South Road. It's being delivered in partnership with the state government of South Australia. It will upgrade the North-South Corridor between the River Torrens and Darlington. The section specific to my electorate will be from the River Torrens all the way down to the Kurralta Park and Plympton area, which is absolutely congested with motor vehicles from 6 am right through to 8 pm or 9 pm every single day. This motorway will free up traffic, allowing people to save time on their trips to and from work. Even 10 minutes a day, when you add it up, is 50 minutes at the end of the week or 60 minutes for people who work six days a week. Think about that. That one extra hour to read to the children before they go to bed, to help prepare dinner—to spend quality time with your family—makes a massive difference.

Once finished, the River Torrens to Darlington project will allow motorists to avoid 21 existing sets of traffic lights between the River Torrens and Darlington. It will complete the non-stop, 78-kilometre North-South Corridor between Gawler and Old Noarlunga. Back in August I was delighted to join the Prime Minister, the Premier of South Australia and the other state and federal members of parliament whose electorates this project will go through to announce the preferred alliance partner to deliver South Australia's biggest ever infrastructure project. The Torrens to Darlington project will support approximately 5,500 jobs per year during main construction. Ninety per cent of labour hours will be undertaken by South Australians, with an agreed minimum six per cent Indigenous employment on the project, 600 jobs for apprentices and trainees, and opportunities for more than 220 long-term unemployed people.

Deputy Speaker, another exciting project is the $90 million—again fifty-fifty with the state government—Grange Road, Holbrooks Road and East Avenue intersection upgrade to relieve congestion and improve safety and connectivity for all road users at that location. The upgrade will remove a staggered intersection and create a direct connection, across Grange Road, between Holbrooks Road and East Avenue. I have spent over the decade writing to different transport ministers about this project and I'm very pleased that this Labor government has listened and made this announcement.

This project, being delivered as part of an $850 million suite of projects, is designed to ensure Adelaide's road network functions efficiently during construction of the T2D project—the Torrens to Darlington project—and once it is completed. Community engagement on the project is continuing, and, judging by the large turnout at recent community meetings, I know the community is excited about the upgrade.

Finally, I'd like to mention the tram grade separation projects. These will benefit residents in the federal electorates of Adelaide, Boothby and Hindmarsh. We are investing $600 million to remove three level crossings where the Glenelg tram line crosses Marion Road and Cross Road, Plympton, and Morphett Road, Morphettville. (Time expired)

Terry Young (Longman, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.