Milton Dick (Oxley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

Indeed, we need consistent rules across both sides of the chamber. You're correct, Mr Deputy Speaker. And if there was ever a case of pork-barrelling to the electorate, this bill is nothing more than a pork barrel. We know that this government works from inept policy to inept policy. We know that the Deputy Prime Minister can't think of anything better than wasting taxpayers' dollars in what can only be described as a senseless move to set up the Regional Investment Corporation—we didn't hear about that from the member for Murray or any of those opposite—at a cost to taxpayers of $81.4 million over the forward estimates. We know the Deputy Prime Minister has a lot on his plate, but reading this bill and going through what it's going to mean, the purpose of this bill is to establish an organisation to do something that the states and the Northern Territory are already doing. The RIC will administer farm business loans, as we heard, and, on behalf of the Commonwealth, administer grants of financial assistance to the states and the Northern Territory for water infrastructure projects, concessional loans, from 1 July 2018. But the loans have already been delivered by the state and Northern Territory governments and will continue to be administered by the states and the Northern Territory.

So this can hardly be true, when, as a result of all of this, taxpayers are going to be sent a bill of $81.4 million. Further to this, the Regional Investment Corporation, put forward by the potentially invalid Deputy Prime Minister and invalid government, has been developed with no cost-benefit analysis as to whether the corporation will actually deliver on any of the claims—a great idea apparently by this Deputy Prime Minister, backed in by members of the government more desperate to prop up the problems of the Deputy Prime Minister than actually talk about the bill, but without any cost-benefit analysis put forward by the government.

We know they have some form in this area, because there's been no transparent or fair process undertaken by the government in determining where to locate the Regional Investment Corporation. The bill was referred to the Senate Standing Committee on Rural and Regional Affairs and Transport, and they tabled their findings only a matter of days ago. The committee recommended the bill be passed in its current form, yet the government has already made amendments to its own bill. We know there's a lot of confusion on that side of the parliament, whether it be about legitimacy to serve in the parliament, about turning up to vote or about seconding and moving the wrong motions. A Senate standing committee recommends passing the bill in its current form, yet the government is making amendments.

The Deputy Prime Minister, we know, has been declared a New Zealand citizen, yet the Prime Minister says he can stay, when we know the other senior minister responsible for this has had to stand down. It hasn't been a great week or month for the National Party. Where's the consistency there? The government knows that the corporation is going to be established in the member for Calare's electorate. We know this isn't a coincidence, but we know that the government is claiming that the establishment of the RIC is 'the logical step in meeting the government's commitment to agriculture, as set out in the landmark    Agricultural Competitiveness White Paper, in excess of $4 billion.'

This statement is exaggerated and gives the impression that somehow the government has provided meaningful investment in agriculture. It has not. In fact the bulk of the $4 billion is made up of concessional loans that farmers are currently not taking up. We know this is because of the design of the program, with the government failing to properly consult or understand if their new drought loan scheme would be attractive to drought-affected farmers.

The RIC will face the same difficulties. Its role will be to provide loans to farm businesses subject to the applicant meeting certain criteria which will be centred on the viability of the farm business. It's important to understand that the RIC will be bank 'of last resort', but the farm businesses will need to be assessed as being viable. Whether a farm business is determined as being viable has been a major issue for the states when developing the guidelines for concessional loans, with no signs that this will be resolved under the new proposed RIC. On top of all of this, the government has not taken any genuine consultation about the functions and responsibilities of the RIC, and is establishing the RIC in Orange with no cost-benefit analysis about the outgoing costs either.

What's more, the government has chosen to establish the RIC in Orange using the same type of government policy order that was used when the then Deputy Prime Minister announced the decision—and who can forget this one—to move the Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority from Canberra to the northern New South Wales town of Armidale, in the Deputy Prime Minister's electorate of New England, by 2019. As reported by the independent government news website, the APVMA relocation, which involved about 190 staff, mostly highly specialised, failed a government-commissioned cost-benefit analysis.

We get lots of lectures from those opposite about reining in expenditure of taxpayers' dollars, and about government efficiency, but when the rubber hits the road, time and time again they've just been found nothing more than professional pork barrels. We know that that decision led to many staff walking out the door, including the chief executive and some of our top regulatory scientists and lawyers. The government also conducted its own $272,000 cost-benefit analysis, which found there were no material economic advantages to support the relocation. Think about this: they are making decisions in their own interests, not making decisions in the national interest.

Further to this, Ernst and Young established the move would cost at least $23.19 million. This includes redundancies for 85 per cent of the APVMA staff the report identified as unwilling to move to Armidale. The plan to move the agricultural chemicals regulator exposed the government, we know, to further ridicule after it was revealed that the Canberra based public servants were working out of Armidale's McDonald's, using the free wi-fi because they had nowhere else to work. That came out at a February Senate estimates hearing.

See this speech in context