Senate debates

Tuesday, 2 April 2019

Bills

Export Finance and Insurance Corporation Amendment (Support for Infrastructure Financing) Bill 2019; Second Reading

1:41 pm

Photo of Tim StorerTim Storer (SA, Independent) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation Amendment (Support for Infrastructure Financing) Bill 2019. In an era where the Indo-Pacific is the centre of world power politics, it is more important than ever for Australia to step up its engagement in the region. Australia prides itself on being a regional player, working closely with our neighbours in aid, trade, security and investment. For this reason, any efforts by Australia to increase investment in our Indo-Pacific partners for the betterment of our region is welcome. I therefore applaud what this bill hopes to achieve.

Targeted and comprehensive investment in our region will only improve Australia's relationship with our neighbours. This is certainly in Australia's best interests. However, any efforts made to invest in our region must also be compliant with two simple principles. First, any investment must be not only in Australia's interests but also in the interests of the recipient country. It is antithetical for us to invest in our neighbours if such investments actually end up hurting our neighbours. Second, we must comply with our international obligations. Australia is a strong and steadfast proponent of rules based international order when on the world stage. We hurt our legitimacy and integrity if we advocate for one thing and then do another.

Unfortunately, the bill in its current form falls short of these two principles. For this reason, I propose two amendments which aim to rectify these shortcomings. First, the bill as it currently stands only requires that investments are in Australia's interests. This is insufficient. We must ensure our investments in the region are not only in our interests but in the long-term interests of our neighbours. We cannot expect this bill to help Australia build stronger regional relationships if we don't ensure that our investments actually assist our neighbours. For this reason, my proposed amendment would require a suitable legal, administrative and policy framework for any investment. It would also remove the requirement for maximum Australian benefits to be sought from any investment. This requirement hurts Australia's reputation in the region. Whilst the likelihood of Australian benefits should also be a consideration, maximising the benefit to Australia should not be the overarching consideration for investments.

Second, it is concerning that the Australian Senate wishes to pass a bill which allows us to undermine our legally binding commitments under the Paris Agreement when we invest in our overseas partners. Under article 2 of the Paris Agreement, Australia committed to:

Making finance flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emissions and climate-resilient development.

Any investments Efic makes under these new arrangements should be consistent with this commitment. The truth is that Australia is a wealthy nation that has the capacity to help its neighbours develop clean, suitable energy and infrastructure. To pass this bill without a requirement that we comply with our commitments under the Paris Agreement would undermine our commitment to the rules based international order. It would also be a missed opportunity to help our neighbours develop sustainable infrastructure. For this reason, my second amendment would require investments to be consistent with achieving the aims, objectives and obligations of the climate change conventions passed in Paris. It is a shame that such issues were not more deeply considered by the Senate Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade inquiry. The truth is that the committee rushed the process, notably not even holding public hearings. For a reform as significant as this bill, this is simply unacceptable.

Having worked in Vietnam for the World Bank and in other countries in our region and in other private sectors, I am completely committed to targeted, comprehensive and meaningful investment by Australia in the Asia-Pacific's development. But any such investment must always comply with our international obligations and must seek to not only benefit Australia but also benefit the recipient of any such investment. For this reason, I am pleased that Australia seeks to invest more widely in the region. However, I am disappointed that a structure we have chosen to use to facilitate such investment, as laid out in this bill, has clear shortcomings, which has the potential to lead to worse outcomes for our region and Australia's reputation at large.

Comments

No comments