Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

Sorry; I direct my comments to the chair.

The report actually selectively quoted a range of material from submissions. Unfortunately, the majority of submissions—88.5 per cent of submissions—supported decentralisation and, indeed, many of them went on to support the move of the APVMA directly. They were not quoted; they were actually derided in the majority report—seemingly, they were not relevant to the terms of reference. Well the terms of reference went specifically to the government's decision to back its election promise and move the APVMA from Canberra to Armidale and, in that, looking at any other matters. It went to the very heart of decentralisation.

It is very sad to see the Labor Party now, following Whitlam's decisions around decentralisation and, in the mid-eighties, shifting CSIRO from Sydney to Hobart. There were a lot of scientists in CSIRO who were very, very upset that they could no longer kayak across the harbour to work—I think it was in about 1985—but they have found a very welcoming home in Hobart. There were some staff issues in the beginning, but now, when you look at what an iconic, world-class scientific program is being conducted down there, particularly with the focus on Antarctic research, no-one could doubt that that was not a fantastic move.

Similarly, there is the New South Wales government's decision to move the department of agriculture from Sydney to Orange. We heard throughout this inquiry from a councillor in Orange, Mr Kidd, who said, 'Yes, there were some problems'. I think the direct quote of Mr Kidd was, 'We'll all be rooned, Hanrahan' when the announcement was made to move the department of ag out to Orange. I said, 'How is it now, Mr Kidd?' He said, 'Well, we'd have a riot in the streets of Orange for the first time if anybody suggested moving it back.' I think that goes to the broader point: it is a concern sometimes if you, personally, are needing to shift, but when we looked at the actual evidence, there had been 200 job applications to the agency and, indeed, those younger staff within the agencies were really quite looking forward to the move to Armidale.

But going to my critique of the report, which we are still getting to, about selectively quoting from the evidence and choosing not to include more than 88.5 per cent of it: the opposition senators who put together the majority report claimed the terms of reference did not cover decentralisation. That simply was not the case. We had submissions from regional councils right across the country, from regional development corporations right around the country, who not only said they supported decentralisation, but also made very articulate, well thought out cases of why they should be considered as a potential space and place for relocation of government agencies and jobs. The only council actually quoted in the majority report is the City of Cessnock. That is an ALP dominated municipality within the Labor held seat of Hunter. Joel Fitzgibbon likes to make reckless claims of pork-barrelling, but it is pretty hard—that would mean we would not be spending any money in regional Australia as a government. We hold most of the seats—that is the reality—so actually servicing those communities as a government is not pork-barrelling.

The other issue the Labor Party relied on quintessentially encapsulated the Labor Party's understanding of regional Australia. The shadow minister commissioned some research from the Parliamentary Library to look at the government order that said 'these agencies needed to be located outside of 150 kilometres from a capital city'. Joe Citizen, Mary Sixpack, Mary Housecoat: all of us would think a capital city or the centre of a city is the GPO. But, dear shadow minister, in order to fit his political argument, used a measurement that saw places like Sorrento and country towns like Romsey in my home state of Victoria counted as 'Melbourne', and the outer boundary of that particular geographic area became where he measured 150 kilometres. So he actually cut out a lot of potentially suitable places for relocation. When we looked at going from the GPO, we added 19 potential locations. Unfortunately, Joel, Romsey is not in Melbourne. I could go on with Brisbane and Sydney examples, but I am going to run out of time.

I want to highlight some of the communities in regional Victoria that made a great case to this inquiry about why they should be selected. There was the City of Greater Bendigo. Bendigo is a great goldmining town and is where my office is located. A lot of people think that decentralisation—moving agencies and jobs out of capital cities to the regions—is doing the regions a favour, is giving a bit of economic development and is putting some brains into a country town, where clearly there are not any. I could go on and on with the stereotypes. But what we saw in this inquiry was regional capital after regional capital stand up and say, 'It's in your best interests to put those jobs here, not just for the economic interests but for policy outcomes.'

For instance, the city of greater Bendigo has a great tradition of financial expertise, with the Bendigo Bank et cetera. Having that sort of capacity makes Bendigo an ideal candidate for relocating the Regional Investment Bank, for instance. I know they were in the mix for that; unfortunately, they lost out. Similarly, Wodonga made a great case that being in the middle of the Murray-Darling Basin, being part of the communities directly affected by the decisions of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority and given its proximity to Canberra and Melbourne make it an ideal place to locate some of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority staff. That is fantastic. I know they have welcomed the 10 jobs that have come to them locally.

I have to put this on the record. I recommend anyone actually interested in this issue read the dissenting report of government senators and participate in the House committee into this exact issue. Unfortunately, this committee had a day's hearing in Canberra, did not go to Armidale, where the APVMA is going to be housed—there were so many issues fleshed out, but we did not go there—and did not go anywhere else in regional Australia except Townsville, where we had a half-day hearing. We had five councils from Victoria and five from New South Wales on a teleconference panel and they had roughly five minutes apiece to make their case. That simply was not good enough. I think that to do this issue justice it is appropriate to have a committee that will travel throughout regional Australia and flesh out the great benefits that decentralisation of government agencies and jobs can bring not just to the communities where they will be housed but indeed to the governments that they serve.

In terms of participating in this inquiry and the outcomes, I know there were claims made around the finance minister's involvement. The government acted with integrity every single minute of the application of this government order, and to suggest otherwise is simply a misrepresentation of the truth. We absolutely back the decentralisation agenda and very much welcome the government's moves in that direction.