Carol Brown (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Families and Payments) Share this | Hansard source

I also rise to speak on the Land Transport Infrastructure Amendment Bill. I say to Senator Back, through you, Mr Acting Deputy President, not only are the Labor Party amendments needed but also that they are critical to ensuring that we get the best spend for infrastructure in Australia—through those amendments. Because, simply, this government cannot be trusted to spend the money where it is actually needed, and I will talk about that further through my contribution.

For those following this debate, it might seem hard to understand what, exactly, we are debating. In the other place, the minister claimed that this bill was about 'delivering the government's ambitious land transport infrastructure agenda'. This statement just highlights this government's complete lack of vision when it comes to investing in crucial nation-building infrastructure. This bill seeks to change the name of the Nation Building Program (National Land Transport) Act 2009 to the Land Transport Act 2014, and it also eliminates some out-of-date provisions in the existing legislation. I would not say that this constitutes 'delivering', nor that it can be considered 'ambitious'. The other thing that this bill seeks to do is extend funding for the Roads to Recovery program. This formalises the Labor government's decision in the 2013 budget to continue the existing Roads to Recovery program beyond 30 June of this year—that is a $350 million program which expired on June 30 because of this government's incompetence and inability to manage their own legislative agenda.

Labor will be seeking to make two amendments to this bill. The first Labor amendment will require consultation with Infrastructure Australia before projects are approved, and will provide greater transparency around the decision-making. There has been much debate in this place on the need for transparency in relation to infrastructure spending. Many stakeholders in the infrastructure debate have called for greater transparency and accountability around decisions on how the Commonwealth government spends its infrastructure funds. In response to the views of stakeholders, Labor's first amendment requires the minister to seek the views of the government's infrastructure expert adviser, Infrastructure Australia, before approving funds for a project. Labor's amendment will also require a full evaluation by Infrastructure Australia of any project above $100 million in value. Finally, this amendment would require that, in approving funds for a project, the minister must make public not only Infrastructure Australia's findings on the priority of the project but also its evaluation of cost-benefit. Those opposite should be supportive of the Labor amendments, given that only four days before the election Mr Abbott said that no infrastructure projects worth more than $100 million would be funded without a published cost-benefit analysis. We already know that that commitment has been broken, along with a lot of other commitments and promises that have been broken by this government.

The second Labor amendment would formalise the Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program as a program under the act. The Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program is an initiative taken under the former Labor government. The program targets infrastructure around heavy vehicle driver fatigue, and funds rest stops along highways to provide more options for drivers to take a break. In its current form, this bill—like all of this government's infrastructure policy—is just spin. The change of the name, with the removal of the term 'nation-building' from the statute books, seems little more than an attempt to remove any hint of the former Labor government from the infrastructure debate; any hint of the work that the former Labor government did on infrastructure; and any hint of the investment that the former Labor government made into nation-building infrastructure for Australia.

I can understand why those opposite might seek to do that. For a government with no real vision for infrastructure investment, the Labor Party's record on investment would be intimidating. I have had a number of representations from local councils concerned about future funding for Roads to Recovery. This concern is a result of scaremongering by those opposite. Labor does, and always has, supported the Roads to Recovery program. The simple truth of the situation, as set out in the 2013-14 Commonwealth budget papers, is that the Labor government extended Roads to Recovery funding across the forward estimates. Labor allocated $1.75 billion in the 2013-14 budget for the next five years of the program; it is already budgeted for for the next five years. However, the first quarterly payment for this financial year, which is due to be paid to councils next month, is in limbo because the government would not agree to the sensible amendments proposed by Labor that would have increased transparency in major infrastructure investments. That is why the member for Grayndler, Anthony Albanese, yesterday sought to introduce a private member's bill in the other place that would amend existing legislation to extend Roads to Recovery. Yesterday Mr Albanese sought to bring on debate on his private member's bill and give councils the certainty they want by extending this program. However, the Abbott government opposed even debating the legislation. They shut down a move by Mr Albanese on his private member's bill. They would not even allow debate on his bill.

Not only has the incompetency of those opposite prevented the Roads to Recovery program being extended before it expired on 30 June 2014. Now their sheer stubbornness has seen them reject Labor's attempt to sort this issue out. Labor understands how critical investment in infrastructure such as roads and rail is for the economic development of this country. Labor understands how critical it is to make the right investment in the right infrastructure projects. That is why Labor doubled the roads budget to $46.5 billion and upgraded 7½ thousand kilometres of road, lifted local government road grants by 20 per cent, invested $3.4 billion in rail freight network over six years, rebuilt more than a third of the rail network—that is 4,000 kilometres of track—and committed more investment in urban rail infrastructure than all predecessors. Labor understands the importance of these nation-building projects, and has invested in our vision for the country.

In my home state of Tasmania people know how important investment in critical infrastructure is for economic development. Unfortunately, those opposite have failed the people of Tasmania and have tried to fool them by reannouncing infrastructure projects in the budget. They reannounced our entire nation-building package, including the same funding for the freight rail revitalisation, for the Brooker Highway and for the Huon Highway. In fact, the only new thing in the budget for Tasmanian infrastructure was a cut—a cut of $100 million to the funding of the Midland Highway. Labor had committed $500 million over 10 years for this critical project, and now there is only $400 million. This is something that Minister Truss is apparently proud of, as he highlighted this project in his second reading speech on the bill we are debating here today. I might say that Senator Abetz also seems very proud of the fact that there was a cut of $100 million from the Midland Highway.