Matthew Canavan (Queensland, Liberal National Party) Share this | Hansard source

The government will not be supporting this amendment for reasons similar to those I outlined earlier in speaking to the initial Greens amendment. For similar reasons, this is not a requirement of other similar government programs. As I said earlier, the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, which this legislation and the mandate have been heavily influenced by, has no specific requirement under its legislation to conduct these kinds of cost-benefit analyses or the detail that has been outlined here by the Greens. We do not think it is appropriate to try to replicate assessments that will be done, of course, by other processes, as outlined by Senator Waters in her contribution.

In terms of what is required under the legislation and the related investment mandate—the proposed investment mandate that the government has put out—as I indicated in my summing-up speech, there will be no major changes to it. It requires that all projects must meet particular criteria, including that they be in the public benefit. It is going to be up to the board how they apply the investment mandate for that criteria and other criteria, but it is a mandatory criteria under that mandate that it is of public benefit. The government sees no need to impose additional red tape on infrastructure in northern Australia, particularly when this kind of process does not apply to other areas where government assistance is provided, including through a very similar facility: the Clean Energy Finance Corporation's arrangements.