Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Hansard source

I have to say that I am both a little disappointed, obviously, that these very good amendments have not been supported by the government and also a little surprised. Mr Temporary Chairman of Committees Murray, no doubt from your long time in the Senate you would be aware of the rhetoric from those on the other side about the three tenets of transparency, accountability, and effectiveness and efficiency. They are the sorts of things that we look for in a piece of legislation. Certainly when the opposition constructively considered this bill those were the three areas that we looked at: transparency, accountability, and efficiency and effectiveness.

In terms of transparency and the tabling of directions, we moved some simple amendments that dealt with technical aspects to ensure that there was some transparency about the minister’s directions to Infrastructure Australia. In terms of efficiency, our amendments were about actually allowing some independence with Infrastructure Australia—and there are some issues about transparency there that I will get to in a moment. There were accountability issues about the employment of a coordinator and how you went about those things. I am surprised because those are the essence of the rhetoric we hear from the Labor Party. That rhetoric is simply not substantiated when it comes to their actions, because those are the fundamentals behind our amendments.

Whilst we are disappointed, we think there are several aspects of this bill that remained flawed—and I have discussed a number of those flaws in this place already. I am disappointed that Infrastructure Australia will not be able to be independent, particularly with regard to being able to actually scrutinise Labor’s election promises—which is really important. We know that those election promises in the area of infrastructure are there, but what we would like to know is: are these appropriate? Is it the right infrastructure? Is it the right time? Is it actually an appropriate investment or just another cost to be foisted on the Australian people? Those are the sorts of questions that Infrastructure Australia could well have asked. It is unfortunate that that amendment has been rejected by the government. Clearly transparency is only part of their rhetoric and not part of their action.

I should not really be surprised, but it is a matter of regret, that the government have rejected an amendment that would protect them from that terrible temptation of jobs for the boys. They seem to have failed on the issue of jobs for the boys at pretty much every hurdle. The first hurdle was what to do about the car industry. It was a case of: ‘I know. Steve Bracks is a bit of a mate. We’ll toss him the job.’ Now I am not cynical, but I do speak to people in the wider Australian community and I know that they think that perhaps Labor need to be protected from some of those temptations. Our amendment was to simply provide protection from temptation.

The opposition have always said that we will not oppose the establishment of Infrastructure Australia. We are prepared to give it a go and see how it will work. We will continue to be rigorous to bring Labor to account and ensure that the establishment of Infrastructure Australia helps rather than hinders infrastructure. It is for these reasons that we will not be insisting on the amendments. Again I am very disappointed and somewhat surprised, when the rhetoric is all about transparency and accountability, that these amendments the opposition put forward, whose fundamentals go to the heart of providing transparent and accountable government, have not been supported by Labor. Labor have failed at their very first hurdle.