Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Hansard source

It simply shows Labor's approach to Northern Australia. Here they are, setting out to destroy the industry that comes from Northern Australia that contributes so much to Australia, and what do you get from the Labor Party: name-calling, childish, bully schoolyard actions of calling people names. Names do not worry me at all, I have to say, Senator Sterle. Go your hardest! It will not alter the fact. Ask anyone in the minerals exploration industry or in the mining industry—things are being placed on hold. The only reason that there is a slight confidence in the minerals industry is that most international miners can read the opinion polls the same as Australians can, and they are hoping with bated breath that there will be a change of government later in this year. Why? Because we will get rid of the minerals tax that does so much damage to Northern Australia but, on the other side, raises no money for the Australian people. Only Labor could do that, but the thought, the sovereign risk threat of this and other initiatives, like the carbon tax, all show impacts on costs of living particularly in Northern Australia.

Let us move on to beef cattle. Here we had a very successful industry in Northern Australia. Northern beef cattle are not quite the quality of southern beef cattle, but they had found a niche market. There was a very significant trade to Indonesia from Northern Australia. It was booming. It was increasing. People had invested a lot in it. And what happened? The Labor government came along and, without even 24 hours notice either to the industry or to the Indonesians who relied on that food, they banned the export of cattle to Indonesia. So through a couple of actions, the Labor government has clearly imposed upon Northern Australia initiatives which will not help with the development.

That is what this discussion today is all about. There is no plan by the Labor government about the north. Indeed, I refer senators to the estimates of 12 February 2013 when a Labor senator was silly enough to ask some officials about the Labor Party's plans for Northern Australia. I urge people to have a look at pages 104-106. Do you know what it is all about? There is a strategy about this, a committee about that, a forum about something else, an investigation about something. Nowhere in those three pages is there any action. In fact there is very little money, and the little money that was put forward, is all for more studies, more forums, more meetings, more gatherings, more talkfests—but no action.

I am pleased to say that after years—decades—of dillydallying by Labor governments both at Queensland and federal levels, the new Campbell Newman government came into power and within six months was actually allocating water out of the Flinders River. They were doing things that Labor governments state and federal had talked about for decades. Labor across the board will have more investigations, more studies, more analyses, more forums, more talkfests—but no action whatsoever. By contrast, the coalition will have a plan for Northern Australia, and that plan is in the final stages of its release. It relies on and pays tribute to the natural and people assets of Northern Australia. It actually builds upon those natural assets.

Most irrigated agriculture in Australia of course occurs around the Murray-Darling Basin in southern Australia, but regions in Northern Australia record almost twice as much as their average annual rainfall. This rainfall could be put to more productive use without compromising the environment. The surface rainfall in Northern Australia is almost 152,000 gigalitres, of which currently only six per cent is used. To put that in perspective, I indicate that the total water use is about 12,200 gigalitres in Northern Australia and the run-off is 152,000 gigalitres. So there are clearly opportunities there.

But it just does not go to producing food and finding and exporting more minerals—and processing, I might say, more minerals. In Northern Australia we have a particular advantage because of our proximity to Asia. We have a very skilled workforce. We have some of the best universities in the world and, certainly, universities in the tropical part of the world, that lead the way in many areas of science. We have an expertise in health and research, and not just research into human health but also into animal health and into our natural biodiversity that is world class. Bearing in mind that more than a third of the world is in tropical areas, these assets should be more productively used.

These are just some of the advantages that we have in Northern Australia which under Labor have been ignored or, worse still, seriously undermined by taxes on the mining industry and practical destruction of the Northern beef cattle industry. I can understand why Labor is not interested. There are not many members of parliament up there—eight in the upper house, of which I am proud to say nearly all are members of the Liberal or National parties. There are only a couple of senators—Senator Scullion is one from the coalition. There are not many voices up there, but, for the coalition, this is not about votes. It is not about political popularity. It is about doing things for Australia that can be done on the basis of the natural assets and people assets of the North.

As with so many other things, the Labor Party has no plan. They work from day-to-day. They make promises that they think will be useful and then break them with impunity. They have no interest in Northern Australia. They know there are few votes there for them. I and all of us in Northern Australia look forward to the day we have a government that takes a real interest in the sustainable development of the North.