Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am pleased to support the second reading of these bills. The Australian Business Investment Partnership Bill 2009 introduces measures to establish the Australian Business Investment Partnership Ltd and to create appropriations for the government’s investment in ABIP and the government’s guarantee on any additional debt-ABIP issues. The Australian Business Investment Partnership (Consequential Amendment) Bill 2009 amends the Corporations Act by listing the Australian Business Investment Partnership Ltd as exempt from the requirement to hold an Australian financial services licence.

On 24 January 2009, the Prime Minister and the Treasurer announced the establishment of the Australian Business Investment Partnership. ABIP is a temporary contingency measure to provide support for viable commercial property assets where there is a withdrawal from financing arrangements due to the abnormal conditions in global capital markets. It seems to me from listening to some of the contributions here this afternoon that people do not understand that there is a global financial crisis, that people do not understand that workers’ jobs are at risk and that people do not understand that finance is drying up all around the globe. And these people who do not understand it are putting Australian jobs at risk. It is about time that the opposition had some financial credibility in dealing with the global economic crisis and understood what governments around the world are dealing with: the biggest financial collapse since the Great Depression. Yet all the opposition want to do is say no—no to every initiative that the government brings forward to assist the community and to assist business against the economic tsunami that is coming in the shape of the global economic crisis.

This is a temporary contingency measure to provide support for viable commercial assets. The announcement that Kevin Rudd made followed a range of discussions with the major banks regarding actions the government may take to address potential liquidity problems that may emerge as a result of foreign banks withdrawing funding within Australia due to commercial and political pressures within their countries of origin. Make no mistake: these big banks are not only under commercial pressure; the foreign banks that are here are under political pressure in their countries of origin to withdraw overseas funding and put that funding in their countries of origin. Yet here we have the opposition carping and criticising, with no intellectual analysis, with no critical analysis, of the problems that this country is facing and the problems that building workers face in maintaining their jobs in the face of this crisis.

ABIP will operate in a market gap. It will not be creating a market. It will operate in that market gap with other commercial providers who are not able to provide finance due to the global crisis. Accordingly, ABIP is not taking business away from existing financiers. This is buttressed by a pricing policy which will charge a small premium to the market. ABIP is a contingency measure. It may ultimately not write any loans at all. The government is not subsidising ABIP or any of the four major banks which are co-shareholders. The shareholders agreement prevents ABIP directors from passing confidential information back to the shareholders. ABIP will operate on commercial lines and hence is not taking on poorly performing assets to the benefit of other financiers.

ABIP has broad support, both from independent economic experts and the industry. The Urban Taskforce, a not-for-profit organisation representing large urban property developers, fully supports the bill. It understands the crisis that the industry is facing, and it supports the government’s position. General Electric supports this bill. Though it has raised some minor concerns, it generally supports the bill. Eureka Funds Management, a super funds manager, is supportive and has suggested some minor amendments. AMP Capital Investors supports it and has actually suggested broadening the scope of the lending in this bill. The Property Council of Australia—the biggest organisation around in the industry, and whose members are the people actually in there helping create the jobs and build the infrastructure in this country—supports this bill. Frank Gelber, the chief economist of BIS Shrapnel, just destroyed the arguments that were put by the other economists appearing before the committee’s inquiry into the bill. He supports ABIP as preventing a financial crisis and not on the basis of trying to stimulate development. The Master Builders Association, the peak building and construction association in the industry, supports the bill. This is what it has to say:

Master Builders agrees that ABIP should not be used to provide finance for those commercial building projects under construction that are not financially sound but should only be used to provide last resort finance where other sources of finance cannot be obtained.

Mr Harnisch said “Availability of finance and business confidence are the two critical factors that need to be addressed in responding to the challenging economic period facing Australia”.

The proposed ABIP Bill therefore is an important circuit breaker in meeting those challenges.

The industry understands the need for ABIP even if the opposition cannot understand the need for this approach. The opposition has come from the usual suspects. It has come from ‘Mr No’, the Leader of the Opposition, Malcolm Turnbull: no on every initiative; just reject every initiative the government takes to try to assist Australia to manage the global economic crisis. It does not matter if it saves the jobs of building workers; just say no. It does not matter if we are faced with global warming and the need to deal with it—something that the opposition refused to do for 11½ years; just say no. This is an opposition leader with no vision and no leadership for this country. This is an opposition leader whose first reaction to every piece of legislation to assist this country is to say no. Those opposite are the cheer squad for the negative. You sit there and you stick your hand up to say no to helping ordinary Australians deal with the effects of the biggest economic crisis since the Great Depression. You are not interested in jobs; you are only interested in short-term politics and trying to get your eye on the next headline in the Australian. That is your position. You are consumed by negativity, you are consumed by ideology and you are not interested in dealing with the key issues for this country during the global financial crisis.

Who do we then see let loose on the Senate Standing Committee on Economics in support of the government’s negativity? One Dr Henry Ergas—