Susan McDonald (Queensland, National Party, Shadow Minister for Resources) Share this | Hansard source

On behalf of the coalition, I rise to speak on the Infrastructure Australia Amendment (Independent Review) Bill 2023. The purpose of this bill is to amend the Infrastructure Australia Act 2008 to give partial effect to the government's response to the independent review of Infrastructure Australia which was released on 7 December last year. Reviewing Infrastructure Australia was a pre-election commitment of the government and the independent review of this body was announced on 22 July 2022. The review was undertaken by Nicole Lockwood, the chair of Infrastructure Western Australia, and Mike Mrdak AO, a former secretary of the Department of Infrastructure and Regional Development and also of the Department of Communications and the Arts.

Infrastructure Australia is a corporate Commonwealth entity, established by the Rudd government in 2008. The bill provides a new object in the act for Infrastructure Australia to be the government's independent adviser on nationally significant infrastructure planning and project prioritisation. This gives partial effect to recommendation 1 of the independent review. However, the coalition notes the independent review's first recommendation to the government included the advice that Infrastructure Australia's mandate should be expanded beyond advising on nationally significant transport, energy, communications and water infrastructure, to be the government's independent adviser on nationally significant social and economic infrastructure also. Recommendation 6 of the independent review also suggested Infrastructure Australia's remit be expanded to include social infrastructure. These recommendations have been rejected by the government and are therefore not featured in this bill.

The bill also repeals almost all of the current functions of Infrastructure Australia as provided in sections 5A to GB and in sections 5A to 5C of the current act. In place of Infrastructure Australia's current functions, the bill proposes new functions and products to conduct audits or assessments of nationally significant infrastructure to determine adequacy and needs; to conduct or endorse evaluations of infrastructure projects; to develop targeted infrastructure lists and plans; and to provide advice on nationally significant infrastructure matters. The bill also amends the Infrastructure Australia Act 2008 to replace the current 12-member Infrastructure Australia board with three commissioners appointed by the minister, comprising a chief commissioner and two other commissioners. Additionally, transitional arrangements are included in the bill to recognise the existing work of Infrastructure Australia.

So what we have here in this bill is the government admitting that the legislative structure, put in place originally by the now Prime Minister, needs to be fixed and, as a result, it has decided to give Infrastructure Australia a new object, new functions and completely new governance. This bill is framed as giving effect to the recommendations of the independent review, however, a critical assessment of the response to the review shows the government has not in fact accepted a number of its key recommendations. The review received 59 submissions and held 40 meetings, with approximately 140 participants across government and industry. In October 2022, the independent review provided its report to the government, outlining 16 recommendations and a further matter for government consideration.

As mentioned, the government's response to the independent review did not support a number of the report's recommendations. In fact, eight out of the 16 were effectively not supported. The government did not support key recommendations to provide enhanced transparency. An example of this was a proposal that Infrastructure Australia provide two new annual statements to the government which would be publicly tabled to inform budget processes and to report on the performance outcomes being achieved by the Infrastructure Investment Program. The government has suggested annual budget statements will be provided to government, but not made public.

Also, a proposal that the Australian government must formally and publicly respond to Infrastructure Australia's advice, findings and recommendations within six month was not supported. Despite what the government says, the Australian people can clearly see that this administration unfortunately has an aversion to being transparent. The government also did not support the recommendation to form an infrastructure bodies council to enable better collaboration and coordination between Infrastructure Australia and the states and territories. Several other recommendations of the independent review will be implemented via non-legislative processes, including by a ministerial statement of expectation and an infrastructure policy statement on land transport.

The government's changes will reduce the independence of Infrastructure Australia. The government is replacing the 12-member Infrastructure Australia board with three commissioners appointed by the government. This reduces the diversity of expertise at the head of this body and reduces the independent voices on the governing structure. The views of the minister will hold significant influence with the three commissioners who are themselves appointed by the minister. This compares with the current governance model whereby nine Infrastructure Australia board members are appointed by the government and three are appointed from nominations agreed by the governments of the state, the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory.

When added to the redefined functions of Infrastructure Australia in this bill, which require the commissioners to have regard to the government's policies and require them to evaluate infrastructure proposals submitted by the government, it is clear that Infrastructure Australia will enjoy less independence in the future. The government has made no provision in the bill for commissioners to be appointed who have expertise and experience in issues impacting particularly regional Australia. The coalition will propose amendments to address this concern, and I encourage the government and all senators to give close consideration to supporting these.

In addition to making Infrastructure Australia less independent, the government's reforms will make Infrastructure Australia a less authoritative body when it comes to the evaluation of infrastructure projects. The minister wants to shrink the number of projects on the infrastructure priority list. This is even mentioned in the explanatory memorandum. By proposing to streamline Infrastructure Australia's focus on a smaller number of nationally significant infrastructure projects, the government is reducing its utility. The government is also proposing that Infrastructure Australia merely endorse project assessments of the priorities of the state governments. So, instead of one national adviser in infrastructure, there will be eight separate state and territory authorities doing business cases. That's less consistency, not more. This will provide less capability, more bureaucracy and, as we have discovered in the northern Australia agenda, a real missed opportunity for coordination across state and territory jurisdictions.

The Commonwealth government makes substantial investments in public infrastructure, which is delivered and ultimately owned by the states and territories. Often the Commonwealth is investing 50 per cent, or, in regional areas, 80 per cent, of the funding to deliver major road projects. Australian taxpayers expect the Commonwealth parliament to exercise suitable oversight that infrastructure projects provide material benefit and that maximum value for investment is secured, but, unfortunately, there is no evidence that these reforms will deliver any improvement.

The coalition recognises that, since the election, there have been questions over the future mandate and operations of Infrastructure Australia, and, as a result of the government's approach, there were five, let's call them, 'resignations' from the board resulting in several months where the board lacked a quorum with members. Since that time, Infrastructure Australia has been spinning its wheels. It will be interesting to see whether the government cared enough to replace the board members with people from, say, northern Australia or regional Australia. Let's see how well the government goes about appointing union mates to the three commission appointments.

Infrastructure Australia is an important body—well, at least, it used to be. It used to be an important body, and it is important that the parliament provides the organisation with a clear mandate for its future activities.

The federal coalition does not seek to frustrate the passage of the government's legislation; however, we must. We will be putting forward amendments to this bill. This—