Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Senate take note of the answers given by the Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research (Senator Carr) to questions without notice asked today.

The Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research has once again highlighted the reason why he should not be in the ministry, let alone in the cabinet. His ineptness in question time today was highlighted by his incapacity to answer a single question that was put to him, other than one. It was this one: ‘Does the minister agree that Australian manufacturing is expected to continue its historical decline over coming decades?’ He was very definite on that. The answer was no—absolutely, no—and then he went on some tirade. Embarrassingly for this government, the statement that I included in my question was lifted word for word out of the Labor government authorised document on which the Labor Party seeks to build its emissions trading scheme.

So what we have had highlighted today is the Australian Labor Party in full flight with its spin—talking down manufacturing to promote its emissions trading scheme but talking up manufacturing when talking about industry. You see, the government cannot have it both ways. They speak to the Australian people with a forked tongue. They speak out of one side of their mouth when it comes to emissions trading and out of the other side of their mouth when it comes to the manufacturing sector. To use a term employed by the Prime Minister, he has to level with the Australian people and actually tell them what the government believe. You cannot have this spin, which is so diametrically opposed in two separate portfolio areas. The government have to bring the spin together and tell us what the actual substance is. Either they support the Treasury modelling, and therefore say that that is a sound foundation for their emissions trading scheme, or they reject it—as Senator Carr, the minister for industry, did during question time—and thereby undermine their whole emissions trading scheme.

But of course it does not come as a surprise to those of us on this side of the chamber that Senator Carr has got himself into this great difficulty, because these people only consider spin; they are never worried about substance. A new car plan for a greener future is a wonderful 21-page document, we are told—until you realise that page 2 is blank, page 4 is blank and page 12 is blank. They have put blank pages in this document to try to pad it out a bit, to try to give it substance. But when you ask, ‘Where is the substance?’ there is a chapter called ‘The details’. I started to get excited. I thought ‘The details’ would put some meat onto the bones. So in this 21-page document—in fact, it is only an 18-page document—the details are contained not in 12 pages or 15 pages but in three pages, in a chapter called ‘The details’ on pages 9, 10 and 11. So Labor say to the Australian people, ‘We have the details in three pages for the spending of $6.2 billion’—that is at the rate of over $2 billion per page. And the government say, ‘We’ve got a serious plan for the car industry.’ Of course they do not—and they know it. That is why this pathetic document has to be padded out with three blank pages, to try to make it weighty—to give it some weight in the event that somebody actually were to put it onto a set of scales. Of course, the real scale that this document is going to be weighed on and measured against is that of its results. We had the minister claiming all sorts of wonderful results today—and we will keep him to that.

But I will return to the point on which I started, and it is this: the government have today been caught out by their own overspinning. Sure, they love taking the egg beater to any issue and trying to whip it up, but today the meringue has collapsed on them. It has absolutely collapsed on them, and in fact it is all over Senator Carr’s face because he spun a bit too much and what he said today in question time is a complete contradiction of that which the government is relying on to sell its emissions trading scheme. I invite the Prime Minister to intervene to sort out this mess, to give some certainty to the car industry and also some certainty to the government’s approach to the emissions trading scheme.

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That contribution by Senator Abetz really just demonstrates the absolute poverty of the position of the opposition in respect of this issue. For five minutes we heard Senator Abetz complain about the government having confidence in the manufacturing industry. The fact that we had confidence in the future of the manufacturing industry seemed to upset Senator Abetz so much that he felt he had to get up on his feet for five minutes and attack us for the audacity of having confidence in one of the major industries in this country—one that contributes over 10 per cent to Australia’s economy. How dare we have confidence in this economy! And I guess that demonstrates the position that the opposition used to have when they were in government. They did not care about the manufacturing industry. They did very little to support it. They never had a plan for anything. And they want to attack us because we have a plan, we have a strategy and we have a vision for the manufacturing industry.

We do not want to be part of a country that makes nothing. But that is what the previous government, the now opposition, set us on a course to achieve: to be a country with no plan, no vision, no strategy and no hope. That was their vision for Australian manufacturing, but it is not this government’s vision. We are proud of standing up for manufacturing and we are proud of the announcements that were made yesterday, specifically on the vehicle industry—and I will go through some of those in a minute. All the previous government did was to throw some token money at an industry. Did they say to the industry: ‘We want to help you develop into new technologies; we want to help you take the next step; we want to help you position yourself for the next decade, the next two decades, the next 50 years, for the sake of our kids’ jobs, for the sake of our industry, for the sake of working families’? No, there was none of that. It was simply a case of throwing a bit of money here and there, with no plan for the industry, no assistance. It was a pathetic response from them when they were in government, and what a pathetic response we just heard from Senator Abetz, attacking what is a most visionary plan—the comprehensive industry strategy plan that has been outlined by Senator Carr and is 100 per cent supported by the Prime Minister.

A New Car Plan for a Greener Future will provide $6.2 billion in assistance over 13 years. It will revitalise an industry that is critical to the Australian economy and the Australian community. It demonstrates the government’s commitment to manufacturing, its commitment to innovation and its commitment to providing Australia with high-quality, high-skill, high-wage jobs—something the previous government, the now opposition, represented by Senator Abetz, simply do not care about and have discarded. Their view of the industry when they were in government was that it had no hope—’Don’t worry about it.’ That was a shameful position and it was a shameful performance by Senator Abetz in this place today.

Labor’s New Car Plan for a Greener Future consists of a new, better-targeted, greener assistance program called the Automotive Transformation Scheme, which will run from 2011 to 2020 and provide $3.4 billion to the industry, not just as a handout but in strategic placement to generate investment to ensure that the car companies investing in this country invest in new technologies and place this industry—and place Australia, by placing this industry—at the forefront of technology and at the forefront of manufacturing. That is our vision—a vision that we wish was shared by the opposition.

Senator Abetz came in today and asked the question:

Does the minister agree that Australian manufacturing is expected to continue its historical decline over coming decades?

When the minister answered ‘no’, Senator Abetz was upset because there was previous Treasury modelling that indicated that there may continue to be some decline but that does not take into consideration the massive investment that we announced yesterday. We announced that because we have confidence and we are going to put in a plan to make sure that that historic decline, which happened under the previous government’s watch, does not continue. What did we see? Senator Abetz got up and said, ‘But it will continue.’ He was disappointed that this government does not share that pessimism. He was absolutely devastated that this government does not share that pessimism. He wanted to score a point by saying that we were wrong; we should be pessimistic about the industry. That is what he wants. That is what he sees as a victory because that is what he stood for when in government and that is what he stands for now as shadow minister for industry. It is a shameful performance and he should hang his head in shame. (Time expired)

Alan Ferguson (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I call Senator Joyce.

Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Deputy President.

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You’re just as bad, Bananaby.

Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think that interjection is a breach of standing order 184, Senator Marshall. So if you want to retract it, you can.

Nick Minchin (SA, Liberal Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy President, I rise on a point of order. Senator Marshall, who generally is regarded with some respect on this side of the chamber, is guilty of a significant breach of etiquette in this place in interjecting across the chamber when Senator Joyce had only just risen to his feet. Senator Marshall used what I think are insulting references to Senator Joyce, and I think you ought to ask him to retract his remarks.

Alan Ferguson (SA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I apologise, but I was in conversation with the Manager of Opposition Business when Senator Joyce started his remarks, so I did not hear what Senator Marshall said. If Senator Marshall feels that he should withdraw the remarks then I invite him to.

Gavin Marshall (Victoria, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

If other senators are offended, I am happy to withdraw.

Barnaby Joyce (Queensland, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We heard Senator Marshall say that they have a plan, they have a vision and they have a strategy. Unfortunately, we are relying on their previous form in how they are going to deliver this. That is the problem with the Labor government—their form in delivering things is so fundamentally misguided. We have had a clear example lately of Labor Party form. We saw Labor Party form with the $10.4 billion stimulus package, which was delivered with no homework. That figure was just plucked out of thin air. Is this the sort of form, substance and diligence that has gone into this program? We saw the form of the Labor government with the bank guarantee, and now we see the fallout of that form being delivered as a complete insult to the car industry. We now have trouble with organisations like GMAC and GE. Finance for the purchase of Australian cars has fallen through the floor because of the form of the current Labor government and their complete and utter ineptitude in the delivery of these packages. It is Labor Party form and ‘diligence’ that is leading the Australian car-manufacturing industry into a period of crisis. The Labor government delivered the luxury car tax, which has actually brought a reduction in the sales of Australian manufactured cars. It is this Labor Party form that we query.

The coalition has a complete record in supporting the manufacturing industry. In fact, one of the greats of my party, ‘Black Jack’ McEwen, was instrumental in bringing structure and support to the Australian car-manufacturing industry in 1963. McEwen talked about bringing about an effective and stable protection of employment and investment in this area. Our position and our history of looking after the car-manufacturing industry are absolutely on the board. I find it completely insulting to hear Senator Marshall talk about the investment that the coalition government put into the manufacturing industry as tokenism and throwaway money. That is a sign of the imprudence and improvidence that characterise this government.

It also will be interesting to see the form of the Labor government when it comes to the emissions trading scheme and how it will affect the manufacturing industry. How many more jobs are you going to send overseas because of your form, your lack of diligence and your tokenism in the way these plans are delivered? The coalition’s argument is not about support for the car-manufacturing industry—it never was. The argument, as always, is about the Labor Party’s capacity to be diligent, to be prudent, to put the homework in and to deliver a package that actually has efficacy and an outcome. There is nothing in the form of the current Labor government that they can clearly put their hand on and say, ‘We delivered a well thought out and specific outcome that can be judged by results.’ There is not one result that this Labor government can put on the books. They have the highest inflation rate and the highest interest rates. Unemployment is going through the roof and manufacturing jobs are leaving our shores. Their form is in their score, and their score is disastrous for our nation. How long will they go on delivering this belief in some nirvana that is waiting out there for us, when they completely and utterly lack any capacity to deliver an outcome for our nation now? We will judge this as it comes before Senate inquiries, and I will bet London to a brick that Labor’s form in this package matches precisely their form in the other packages that they have brought to this nation.

Mark Furner (Queensland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Talking about form, I think the Labor Party and the government can speak on our merits and also on our decisive action to make sure that we do not slip into any desperate steps. Obviously, the opposition does not appear to be onside on this point. Global financial systems are experiencing the most significant upheaval in living memory. Here we have the opposition trying to tear things down and trying to throw rocks in a situation where we are able to put security and confidence back into the economy by putting forward legitimate proposals such as the $6.2 billion Green Car Innovation Fund, which was announced yesterday. It balances the economy and the environment.

This is one of the initiatives that we have considered and contemplated to ensure that we provide prosperity in the future for working families. It will help ensure that our economy emerges in strong shape so that we can provide quality jobs and security for working families into the future. This package will result in over $16 billion of additional investments by the automotive sector. It is not about the government putting money forward for a foolhardy suggestion; it is a bipartisan arrangement, with the industry putting money back in, which is essential for both the climate and the economy.

The auto-manufacturing industry is no doubt the pinnacle of manufacturing in Australia. I will go through some of the elements of the plans. We will have an expanded Green Car Innovation Fund of $1.3 billion, brought forward to 2009 and running over 10 years; we will have a better targeted and greener $3.4 billion assistance program for the Automotive Transformation Scheme, the ATS; we will have changes in the Automotive Competitiveness and Investment Scheme in 2010, consistent with the Bracks review; and we will have $116.3 million to provide structural adjustments through mergers and consolidation of the components sector and to facilitate labour market adjustments. There will be $20 million from 2009 to 2010 to help suppliers. They are also an important aspect of the manufacturing industry, particularly the car-manufacturing industry. There will be $6.3 million from 2009 through to 2010 for an enhanced market access program, and a new Automotive Industry Innovation Council to bring in key decision makers to drive innovation and reform. Lastly, there will be a $10.5 million expansion of the LPG vehicle system, which demonstrates our commitment to a greener world and greener society.

That is the form. Those are the plans that the government has in place to enhance and provide a stimulus in the market where it is needed and when it is crucial. It is a new deal for Australian car makers and a new deal for Australian car buyers. We seem to have the states that are relevant to this industry, South Australia and Victoria, on board and we seem to have the employer organisations, like the ACCI, on board. But we look across the chamber here and it appears that we have opposition from that side with respect to stimulating the market. I do not know where they are coming from, because the plan is one of the most crucial parts of our sustained ability to prosper in the future.

The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry have indicated that they are well and truly supportive of this initiative. They have indicated that the plan will promote technology and development and improve the skills base of the automotive sector. They also indicated that it will help the industry to increase its responsiveness in changing market conditions, especially the increased demand for more fuel-efficient vehicles. This is the path we should be going down to ensure that this particularly crucial industry is protected. It reflects our determination to create high-quality, high-skilled, high-wage jobs, the kind of jobs that Australians want for themselves and for their children. It reflects our desire to give Australians greener, safer, more affordable vehicles and choices. Talking about jobs, the car-manufacturing industry employs 64,000 people directly and an estimated further 200,000— (Time expired)

Mary Fisher (SA, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to take note of answers given by Senator Carr. A globally competitive car-manufacturing sector is clearly important to the Australian economy and to jobs. The Howard government invested $3.8 billion in the sector over the six years from 2001 to 2007 to ensure just that. But yesterday’s ‘Rudd rescue’ was bereft of detail as to how it will ensure a globally competitive car-manufacturing industry—an industry that will increase its own investment in the industry in Australia and stand on its own two feet to deliver world-standard cars and provide jobs for Australians.

How will the ‘Rudd rescue’ guarantee that? Minister Carr and the Prime Minister will not guarantee it because they know they cannot. ‘Rudd’s rescue’ is not an evidence based plan, despite the Prime Minister’s promises to the Australian electorate to deliver just that; it is an ill-camouflaged appeasement of Labor’s union mates. It has been dressed up as a response to climate change and to the global financial crisis—a global financial crisis that Prime Minister Rudd says means that year 2009 will get a bit rough. Well, it is a rough response to the rough year into which we are heading. It is a rough response and a rough rescue with no empirics, no evidence and little information. It seeks refuge in the refrains of climate change and the global financial crisis in an attempt to silence the critics of ‘Rudd’s rescue’, and we saw in question time a valid basis for this criticism.

The minister refused to answer a question from your good self, Mr Deputy President Ferguson, about whether the Rudd rescue package will save jobs in the sector. Instead we heard Senator Carr say that the Rudd government does not make promises it cannot keep. What a concession, what an admission. The Rudd rescue package will not save jobs in this sector—and tragically so. The Rudd government knows it to be so. But worse than that was Minister Carr’s answer to a further question from your good self, Mr Deputy President, about how many jobs will be lost in the sector. If jobs are not to be lost, why does the Rudd rescue package set aside some $34 million for a car worker redundancy scheme, and on what basis has that package been calculated?

In question time the government failed to provide empirical evidence to underpin the Rudd rescue package. The minister said that, since the escalation of the global financial crisis on 15 September this year and the collapse of Lehman Brothers, he has not personally spoken to the US heads of Ford or General Motors about the capacity or willingness of those companies to invest in Australia’s car manufacturing sector on a three to one basis. So how can the government claim that the Rudd rescue package will deliver increased investment by the industry in the industry itself in Australia? They simply cannot. The minister says instead that, despite his not having spoken personally to the heads of those two companies since 15 September, there have been discussions with the corporate leadership of those companies. So what, then, are the guarantees that have been delivered by those companies on investment in Australia’s car manufacturing sector? On that question, the minister says that the companies have written to the government. Well, Minister, release that written correspondence to the Australian public. The government must release the letters which the minister himself admits have been written by Ford and GM in respect of this issue. If the government refuses to do so then we will continue to see a Rudd rescue plan which is no better than a rough plan to deal with a rough year ahead.

Question agreed to.