Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Hansard source

by leave—I move amendments (5) and (7) together:

(5) Schedule 1, item 14, page 7 (after line 21), after section 4A, insert:

4B Cost benefit analyses to be made public

(1) The Minister must ensure that the following information about a Black Spot Project, Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Project, Investment Project or Transport Development and Innovation Project is made available on the Department's website, if Commonwealth funding is provided for the project:

  (a) a description of the project;

  (b) when the project is to start and is likely to be completed;

(c) in the case of an Investment Project capital expenditure on which is $100 million or more:

     (i) Infrastructure Australia's evaluation of the project under subsection 17A(2); and

     (ii) any advice given by Infrastructure Australia in relation to the project as mentioned in paragraph 17A(4)(c).

(2) The information must be published no later than 14 days after the Commonwealth first informs a recipient of the funding that Commonwealth funding will be provided for the project.

(7) Schedule 1, item 27, page 10 (lines 4 to 6), omit the item, substitute:

27 Subsections 16(1) and 17(1)

  Omit "a Nation Building Program National", substitute "an Investment".

27A At the end of Division 2 of Part 3

  Add:

17A Consultation with Infrastructure Australia

(1) This section applies to an Investment Project, if capital expenditure on the project is $100 million or more.

(2) Before the Minister approves the provision of Commonwealth funding for the project, the Minister must require Infrastructure Australia to give to the Minister an evaluation of the project so that the Minister can decide whether to approve the project.

(3) Infrastructure Australia's evaluation of the project must:

  (a) contain a cost benefit analysis of the project; and

  (b) specify the priority that Infrastructure Australia would give the project in relation to priorities specified in its current Infrastructure Plan; and

(c) set out any other matter that Infrastructure Australia considers relevant to the project.

(4) In determining whether to approve the provision of Commonwealth funding for the project, the Minister must have regard to:

  (a) Infrastructure Priority Lists and Infrastructure Plans developed by Infrastructure Australia under the Infrastructure Australia Act 2008 to the extent relevant to the project; and

  (b) Infrastructure Australia's evaluation of the project under subsection (2); and

(c) any other advice given by Infrastructure Australia that relates to the project.

(5) Subsection (4) does not limit the matters to which the Minister may have regard in determining whether to approve the provision of Commonwealth funding for the project.

27B Subsection 18(1)

  Omit "a Nation Building Program National", substitute "an Investment".

Opposition amendments (5) and (7) go to amend the issue of prior consultation with the experts at Infrastructure Australia. It is about transparency of advice to government. We believe this is an important element that is central to the much-called-for proper governance in project selection. The Land Transport Infrastructure Act is the sole enabling act that governs the terms under which the infrastructure minister can authorise expenditure of Commonwealth funds on road and rail projects. No other act does this—certainly not the Infrastructure Australia Act, which has a different purpose.

The Infrastructure Australia Act establishes a body of experts who provide advice to government on infrastructure policy and projects. Infrastructure Australia looks at energy and water as well. It looks at best practice project procurement, it looks at what the nation lacks and suggests what it needs, and it flags future needs, assesses project value and flags emerging issues in the sector. It primarily has a strategic focus.

We believe this is an appropriate amendment. There is no reason to expect that a government seeking to amend the act will return to this parliament in the next six years. This is the only time the Senate will have a certain chance to ensure that ministers must seek expert advice from Infrastructure Australia before spending on road and rail projects valued at more than $100 million.

Item seven requires the minister to require an evaluation by Infrastructure Australia prior to approving funds for an infrastructure investment project valued at more than $100 million. Such an evaluation needs to include a cost-benefit analysis, Infrastructure Australia's view on project priority and other views Infrastructure Australia considers relevant. Item five provides that if the project is funded the evaluation must be published on the department's website for all taxpayers to see, within 14 days of notice of funding. The amendment is consistent with the Productivity Commission's call for much-improved infrastructure projects selection, assessment and transparency.

These amendments implement explicit coalition election policy. The coalition had policy about these issues—that is, transparency and cost-benefit analyses. We want to ensure that that promise is not broken, that it does not become another broken government promise. It certainly is about ensuring we do not have the pork-barrelling that has been used in the past by the coalition, using scarce taxpayers money.

This aligns with the government's election commitments on infrastructure as elucidated in the coalition's policy to deliver the infrastructure for the 21st century. What it says in the coalition policy is that to ensure more rigorous, transparent assessment of taxpayer-funded projects we will require all infrastructure projects worth more than $100 million to undergo a cost-benefit analysis. Labor's amendment here does nothing more than implement the exact commitment the coalition made to the Australian people at last year's election. We would expect the coalition to abide by that election promise and support these amendments.