Harry Jenkins (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have received a letter from the honourable member for Lyne proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

Assisting small business in regional and rural Australia.

I call upon those members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

Robert Oakeshott (Lyne, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the members on both sides of the House for staying behind to approve this MPI. This is important because the small business community of regional Australia is entering a difficult phase on the back of the year of the global financial crisis with, for example, no cheques arriving in the letterbox in the next couple of months to get them through with retail spending throughout the Christmas period. That is the reason for raising this MPI, along with the end of a range of measures such as the small business tax break at the end of December, which I would ask the government to consider extending until we are very clear that the impacts of the GFC are over, particularly with regard to regional and rural Australia. I want to quote to the House from a report by the Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations about my region of Australia that was received only this week. It says:

The Mid-North Coast has been one of the most persistently disadvantaged regions in Australia in recent decades and continues to experience high levels of disadvantage. Indeed, a high proportion of the region’s working age population is on income support, while the region’s participation rate of 49.2 per cent in September 2009 remains well below the comparable rate for Australia of 65.1 per cent.

The region’s reliance on at-risk industries, particularly retail trade when the impact of the cash payments begins to recede, and well below average levels of educational attainment suggest that not only is the region currently disadvantaged but may also deteriorate further as the impact of the GFC—

or global financial crisis—

deepens.

So, for all the talk by many over the last month that we are through the worst of the global financial crisis and that we should be winding back the stimulus, I would argue, from a regional perspective and from a small business community perspective, that that is the last thing that government should be doing right now. It is for this reason that this afternoon I put the case for the Minister for Small Business, Independent Contractors and the Service Economy, who is at the table, and the executive to consider the argument that the small business tax break in particular should be extended beyond the 31 December date. I ask that to be considered particularly in the interests of regional small business even if the extension is only in respect of businesses with turnovers under $2 million where an asset of over $1,000 that is purchased becomes applicable for the small business tax break. That would be of direct benefit to the small business community in regions such as mine and throughout Australia for the next six to 12 months, providing a buffer against what is still unknown through that period.

From what I have just read out, you would note that DEEWR themselves are expressing concerns about the future of the mid-North Coast—and I am sure many of the regions are in a similar state—and therefore there needs to be some consideration of further assistance and further support, and the most obvious assistance, from a government perspective, is through the use of tax breaks and tax mechanisms. We have seen some very good support through tax schemes such as those for fuel tax credits and for research and development changes applying to the small business community for tax credits. I would argue that while both of those schemes are continuing the small business tax break would sit very well alongside them as a third prong in providing a buffer and some support for the small business community through the next six to 12 months. So I put that to the minister and to the executive to consider, and hopefully we can hear some good news on that soon.

The importance of the small business community to a region such as mine and regional areas generally is without question, and I think the community is generally recognised by both sides of this chamber as the engine room of regional Australia and of regional life. On the mid-North Coast of New South Wales 95 per cent of the business community is small business. The definition of small business that I use is businesses with five employees or fewer. I know we hear from government a whole range of different definitions about small business, from under 100 employees to under 25 and to under 20. These are genuinely small business operators of microbusinesses and home based businesses and therefore they are not normally the ones to be trawling the corridors of this place to gain benefits through the use of lobbyists and the various ways that vested interests can influence public policy. Their businesses are genuinely the engine room of Australia’s economy and its productivity and therefore deserve some good reflection and some good support from ministers and the executive.

I also mention the Fair Work Bill and the fair work process, which came up in question time, with regard to the nationalising of the industrial relations and occupational health and safety systems. I think that is of great significance to regional small business operators if it is done right. It is a quagmire for small business operators to have to work their way through state and federal legal systems, public and private industrial relations systems and occupational health and safety systems and unfair dismissal laws at various levels and industrial relations commissions at various levels. I think it is a significant breakthrough that we have reached a moment in this parliament’s history when we have seen in the last six months a government putting forward a nationalising of laws and an opposition saying they are 99.98 per cent, in the words of the Leader of the Opposition, in support of that. This is therefore a significant moment in time. But I put a rider on that by saying that when we get down to the detail of some of this legislation it cannot be at the expense of the small business operators in the regions. I quote the example of the hospitality award and the debate that is going on at the moment about the implications of that award. All the various state awards have been thrown into one document and that is creating huge concerns in regional areas, particularly tourism areas such as the mid-North Coast, where new laws are now coming in that potentially see penalties kick in after seven o’clock every day of the week from Monday to Friday.

That is just not going to work in a regional tourism town. That will see a loss of jobs. It will create the absurd situation where on public holidays, days when everyone wants to go out and enjoy themselves and go to coffee shops and restaurants, the doors will be closed because the penalty rates will be too high. So I again ask the government, the executive and the minister to look at some of the details of these changes. While the overall concept is great and everyone is cheering about finally having a national scheme, if, once we burrow into the detail, it is just an exercise of throwing a whole lot of different state based awards together and hoping for the best, then that is not going to work in the regional small business community’s best interests. I particularly flag the restaurant and catering—the hospitality award—bill that is currently being considered and ask for government to look at it through the eyes of regional restaurants and consider the impacts on them, particularly with regard to penalty rates.

I also put on the record my request for some government consideration of the much spoken about but sadly not acted upon issue of decentralisation. We saw it again in a report delivered in this place last night. An excellent report was brought down by the chair of the infrastructure committee, the member for Ballarat, which considered the question of the impact of the global financial crisis on regional Australia. Recommendation 7 and recommendation 8 basically dragged out the same idea that comes up in every single committee, looking at any topic, when committees head to regional areas—that is, this issue of getting government businesses and government departments into the regions. The word ‘decentralisation’ was not used, but basically the concept was thrown up again. Again, the concept has a great deal of support from regional members on both sides, but it is like pulling teeth to get government departments to recognise the benefits to them in being based in a regional area.

There was an example of it last night: in Victoria a government department went regional and, once it happened, they could not be happier. The workforce is secure, they are happy with their lifestyle and the costs are lower to run a business from a regional location. Once it happens, they realise, ‘My goodness, this is the greatest thing that ever happened.’ But getting it to happen is, as I said, like pulling teeth. So once again I say to the minister in the chair, the minister for small business, and to the executive: look at the whole list of committee reports of the last decade and beyond. Once they start to look in regional locations, the recommendation about decentralisation comes up time and time again. Let us get serious about it. If need be, let us push government departments out the door of Canberra into the regions and we will have better government delivery as a consequence. It is guaranteed.

I also flag the ongoing issue that has been wrapped up in stimulus but was an election commitment from this government. A huge success in the regions that I represent is increases of direct money from the Commonwealth to local government. I know the previous government did it in various roads programs—the Roads to Recovery and the Black Spot programs—and the current government has expanded that into community infrastructure. In regional locations, the councils are in many ways the lifeblood of activity, and so this has been a significant project over the last 12 to 18 months. We have seen 30 to 40 projects in communities with between 50,000 and 100,000 people. That is significant work for the small business community. Once we start heading down the path of coming out of the GFC—we hope—I would like to see this direct financing from the Commonwealth to local government continue and expand further than even where we currently are into a whole range of different projects. The community infrastructure program is an important project that I would hope continues beyond stimulus.

I also mention regional development associations. I am not sure about other regions of Australia, but, after a two-year gap, we have now finally on the mid-North Coast got an RDA up and running. The question of financing is still an open-ended one. While there is some money on the table for administration and small projects, if the RDA process and regional development itself are going to be treated seriously by the Commonwealth, then we need to see more money going into the RDA network. You can argue the rights and wrongs of what happened with the area consultative committee money and Auditor-General reports under the previous government—

Tony Windsor (New England, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

A disgrace!

Robert Oakeshott (Lyne, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for New England was caught up very deeply in that. I would hate, to use a cliche, for the baby to be thrown out with the bathwater; I would hate the government to pull money out of that process because the process was distorted by previous governments. If the process of the RDAs is one that the government supports and endorses—bringing the state and federal regional development arms together is eminently sensible—then let us fund it appropriately. Let us get some good money into there, and let us see the small business communities of regional Australia get behind this exercise. Let us let the engine room do its job and let regional small businesses run this country the way they have previously. I would hope the government supports the comments I have made and that we do get some support, particularly, as I said at the start, on the small business tax break.

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting the Finance Minister on Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I am very happy to award the member for Lyne a six.

Robert Oakeshott (Lyne, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You said nine!

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting the Finance Minister on Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

All right, we can negotiate. We will go for a nine. I did not agree with everything he said—

Bruce Scott (Maranoa, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister will not use his prop!

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting the Finance Minister on Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

but I will deduct one out of 10 for the relatively minor things with which I disagreed. I record that they are very harsh judges over there, so even a six would be a distinction by the tough standards that they have applied to me in the past.

I do welcome very much the contribution and initiative shown by the member for Lyne in raising this matter of public importance. Small business truly is a very important matter for debate. I endorse the comments by the member for Lyne about the fiscal stimulus. It does involve more than 70 per cent in spending on infrastructure. The member for Lyne probably did not have time to fit this in, but I refer to one of his media releases earlier this year entitled ‘Oakeshott welcomes over $15 million in primary school infrastructure funding’. So the member for Lyne has never been backward in coming forward in acknowledging the value to his local community of the stimulus package and, in particular, the infrastructure component. He goes on to say:

Also, in this current economic climate it is a great opportunity for local contractors, trades people and suppliers to put their hands up for the work, so they need to register their interest with the NSW Department of Education and Training who will forward their details …

That shows a very active local member taking the initiative to ensure that the local businesses and tradies in his area are aware of the opportunities, and I commend him for doing that.

The short story is that the government has recognised in its two years of government—two years today—the importance of supporting small business in regional Australia and, more broadly, around Australia. Of course, the global financial crisis and the meltdown associated with that could not have been fully anticipated before the election of this government. But when it did arrive we acted early. We were really conscious of ensuring that the benefits of that stimulus spending were spread fairly around Australia. The Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government has been really conscious in ensuring that regional communities do benefit because often, as the member for Lyne will attest, when there is an economic downturn it is our regions that really feel the brunt of it. If it is just an across-the-board policy that is not attuned to the needs of regional Australia, then our small businesses, our tradies and our contractors in those areas will suffer. I come from a small country town in north-west New South Wales called Baradine near Coonabarabran, just on the edge of the Warrumbungles. My father lost his job during a drought in timber quotas in 1970, and that is why I ended up in Sydney and, to cut a very long story short, how I ended up in parliament. It is just another example of how vulnerable regional communities are to an economic downturn. We have always been conscious of that.

I thank the member for Lyne for his support, too, of the small business tax break. It has actually received quite a lot of criticism from the coalition. The last time we had a debate on a matter of public importance it was initiated by the member for Moncrieff. I think he had to do that because he just cannot get a question up. It has been 543 days today since I last had a question from him. In that speech he announced a tax effective investment scheme. The shadow minister for small business said:

From the outset I questioned the wisdom of this policy … we really questioned how many of those 2.4 million small businesses Labor’s policy would actually assist. The answer, as has been played out in the various surveys, is not many at all—the reason being that Labor’s policy requires a small business to have a dollar in order to spend it.

He went on to say:

… the only meaningful expenditure from the small business sector has been on vehicles. So it has hardly been the great economic boost that the Treasurer and the small business minister claim it to be—in fact, it has largely been a flop.

So there is a contrast: the member for Lyne supporting the small business tax break and the coalition describing it as a flop. It is really interesting and timely to report on an MYOB survey that has been released today which indicates that 77 per cent of all business owners report awareness of the tax break and that 71 per cent have taken action or may take action in the future. If six out of 10 is a good number, 71 out of 100 is a beauty. We have the shadow small business minister saying that they are really not going to take it up; only very few have taken it up. Well, 71 per cent is a large number, and the CEO of MYOB says this:

Overall, this latest MYOB Business Monitor finds business improving across Australia, and a good deal more confidence than six months ago. 

He also says:

Support for the Federal Government may have also been boosted by the recent Business Tax Break, which over half … of business owners surveyed say has been or could be helpful to their business.

As I said, it is 71 per cent. So the point there is not really a political point. It is good that the small business community appreciates what the Rudd government is doing, but it is far more important that it is taking advantage of this tax break, and I certainly welcome the support of the member for Lyne.

Figures out yesterday on motor vehicle sales show an increase of 3.7 per cent in October—3.3 per cent higher than a year ago. Market commentary on those figures from the National Australia Bank says:

These data point to businesses on another buying spree into the end of the calendar year when the 50 per cent investment allowance runs out.

And:

… indications that private buyers are stepping into showrooms over recent months to buy attractively priced vehicles as signs of labour market stabilisation accumulates.

What they are saying there is that the showrooms around Australia are doing very well, and I know from my experience in country towns and regional centres that there are always motor vehicle showrooms. They are small businesses. They benefit from the tax break. They have families. They employ people. They should not be derided by the shadow small business minister saying, ‘All this has just involved a few people buying a few cars.’ People buying cars is important. The member for Holt, who is at the table, would attest to that, because in his local area there are car component manufacturers. It is really important in another part of Australia—most particularly, outer urban Victoria, where there are a lot of car component manufacturers. So I would not be criticising or deriding an increase in car sales and activity.

In relation to direct support and advice for small business, I can advise the member for Lyne that we were really conscious of this before the election—so much so that we committed to funding 36 business enterprise centres around Australia. There were around 108 at the time—and we dearly would have loved to have funded all 108. These business enterprise centres are very capable in delivering one-stop shop advisory services. I would like to be able to advise the member for Lyne that there is one in his electorate; but that is not the case, so I will not pretend otherwise. The 36 business enterprise centres that are being funded are spread right around Australia and they are substantially concentrated in rural and regional Australia. In addition, the 34 pre-existing advisory services are being funded through an initiative announced by the Prime Minister at a small business summit in Brisbane in October last year. I know that these are not directly in the member for Lyne’s electorate, but I will just refer to the Clarence Business Enterprise Advisory Service in Grafton and the Enterprise Training Company in Coffs Harbour. It is better than nothing, but, again, we would have liked to have funded more centres.

I think the right way to handle this matter of public importance is by responding to the points the member for Lyne has raised. I am a big fan of decentralisation. I suppose that falls easily from the tongue—and you might say, ‘Well, what are you doing about it?’—but, moving beyond the school modernisation program, much of the infrastructure investment is in rural and regional Australia. In 2006 I wrote a book, Vital Signs, Vibrant Society, which sets out a plan for providing more infrastructure and services in regional Australia. My view is that people will come to regional Australia if the costs are low, the infrastructure is provided and they can move fairly readily back to the cities to see relatives and so on. That would help make regional Australia that much more attractive. I would recommend it to the member for Lyne. It is not rocket science, but it is an endorsement of the sorts of policies that he is talking about.

In terms of direct funding for local government, I think the point the member for Lyne made is that it is effective. But you need to take some care about it. It is not just about giving money unconditionally. Again, this government has been quite systematic in doing that—through the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government. We have had two major local government soirees, big meetings, here in Canberra, and they have been very well received and well attended. So, again, we are in the groove with the member for Lyne there. Similarly with regional development authorities and so on, it is a model that the Minister for Trade was very keen on when he was the shadow minister for industry and regional development.

In respect of award modernisation, I would point out that 4,000 different awards and instruments are being collapsed into just 121. This is a major microeconomic reform that will be of benefit to small businesses. Of course there are some grumbles about some of the details. I know that Restaurant and Catering Australia, through John Hart, have made strong representations. They were sufficiently persuasive that the Minister for Employment and Workplace Relations asked for a new consideration of the award by Fair Work Australia. So we are receptive to legitimate concerns. But let us not lose sight of the overall magnitude of this reform. Collapsing 4,000 awards and other instruments into 121 awards is a mammoth task. It is something that previous governments have talked about. The complexity of the award system has been the subject of complaint by the previous government and by business organisations around Australia. This task is now nearing its end. There is a five-year transition period to address some of the issues that were raised by the member for Lyne. But I put it to this chamber that this is a major reform of large net benefit to small business.

I want to go on to the whole area of a single, national industrial relations system. Just think of the absurdity of incorporated businesses being in the national industrial relations system—which they are now—while unincorporated businesses are caught in the state systems. That is where we are at the moment. The former Prime Minister, Mr Howard, was a very big supporter of a national system. He spoke glowingly of the pressing need for reform in this area. Speaking at the Sydney Institute in 2005, he said:

… six different industrial relations systems is an anachronism for a nation of 20 million people in a region that will be the world’s economic centre of gravity in the 21st century. It is time they recognised that a single system of workplace laws is in the national interest.

Well, we do—but now the coalition do not; now the coalition are opposing it. I think that is a tragedy because, as the minister mentioned during question time, this could be a once-in-a-generation opportunity because those referrals would have to be done in a second time. So we really are saying to the coalition: stop being opportunistic and get in there because small businesses will benefit from being in a single system, as the member for Lyne so eloquently explained. As small businesses grow from being a partnership or a sole trader to being a company, they would have to shift out of the system that they have been in, which would just be ridiculous.

I thank the member for Lyne for his initiative and for the quality of his debate. It was definitely a six, probably a six-plus, and going all the way up to a nine. It was a very elegant contribution indeed. Thank you.

Tony Windsor (New England, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the minister for his comments in relation to some of the issues raised by the member for Lyne. And I would ask him to return my documentation at some stage; otherwise, I will have to rate him fairly low!

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting the Finance Minister on Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Dr Emerson interjecting

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The minister will not provoke the member for New England!

Craig Emerson (Rankin, Australian Labor Party, Minister Assisting the Finance Minister on Deregulation) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Dr Emerson interjecting

Ms Anna Burke (Chisholm, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No—the member for New England has the call. The minister will sit there in silence.

Tony Windsor (New England, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker Scott. It becomes very difficult sometimes, as you are probably aware. I thank the member for Lyne for this matter of public importance. I pick up on a theme that has been reflected through the two speakers, particularly in relation to decentralisation. I listened with interest to the minister’s comments. I have been in public life since 1991, with a period of time in the state parliament until 2001 and here, obviously, since then. There have been a lot of words in terms of decentralisation over those years and not a lot of action. In fact, one of the reasons for standing for the federal arena was the concerns I had directly in relation to competition policy and the way in which it impacted on smaller communities and smaller businesses. Two people on both sides of the political fence have stood out in a sense. The minister for small business mentioned one of them, the member for Hotham. I can remember in the early nineties that the member for Hotham—and I believed this at the time—was a real champion in terms of regional development processes and decentralisation. The other, who some members in this chamber may not know, was the Leader of the Liberal Party at one stage in New South Wales, Peter Collins. He had not dissimilar ideas about how you could actually drive the processes of decentralisation and the policy initiatives you could put in place to encourage people to go to the country and set up businesses.

Two very distinct things are happening at the moment and they are both quite current within this parliament. One is the population debate, which is locked in with some of the climate change issues and water issues, and where people will live. The other is the broader debate about the national broadband rollout. Those two things combined, in my view, really need to be explored under the one policy umbrella. If we are serious about encouraging decentralisation, encouraging small business to develop in country areas and growing our population in country areas, in areas where water and other issues are not a problem, we have to get serious about rolling out the National Broadband Network at a level where it is equitable to all people across the nation. It is the one thing, if it is done correctly, that negates distance as a disadvantage by being a country resident. It changes the playing field. Competition policy and other things have centralised the playing field. Decentralisation rolls off the tongue, as the minister said, but the policy mix that we have been focusing on for the last two decades has been a centralist policy mix, where you develop—and some people have heard me say this before—a feedlot mentality, where the cheapest way to provide the highest number of services to the greatest number of people at the lowest possible cost is to put them in a feedlot.

The National Broadband Network—and this is why I have been very supportive of what Senator Conroy is attempting to do—can break that nexus. When I say ‘can’, that does not mean it will—it can. If we can get the system right so that people who live in the country—or irrespective of where they live—share a common denominator in terms of the rollout of broadband services. Particularly given the population debate that is happening at the moment, we have to start to put some of those things into a policy mix rather than all the different silos we have, where it is a good idea to have this and a good idea to have that and where there is no real focus on what that means in terms of population growth, urban development, country towns, water supply and a whole range of related issues—but they are unrelated issues because of the way they are dealt with by the political process.

There are a few things that I would like to mention. I suggest to the minister for small business: other than the bankers, the people who really know what is going on in the country are the accountants. I would encourage you to talk to the Institute of Chartered Accountants and others, who really know the bottom line in terms of numbers, to find out the sorts of things that need to be encouraged to make sure that decentralisation does occur on some issues. I agree with the member for Lyne when he talked about local government and some of the local government drivers that are out there that are encouraging growth in some of those areas.

I also support the member for Lyne’s call for an extension to the investment allowance. I was in farming—and I still do a bit of farming—when Malcolm Fraser brought out the investment allowance. In hindsight, I do not think that was a good thing to have done because it drove up the price of machinery. We were buying equipment at different times, replacing harvesters and things, and a lot of people were doing the same, which was good for small business, but it drove up the price of the item that we were purchasing. Deputy Speaker Scott, you may remember that particular time. I think this is a different circumstance. Normally I would argue against the investment allowance, as it stood at that particular time, but this is a different circumstance in the economics of the nation. I think it is working. There are a lot of people who are taking advantage of it. We have heard suggestions that you have to be paying tax to take advantage of it, and obviously that is the case, but it flows through the community. If someone buys a tractor, the person who sells the tractor gets the benefit, as does the person who repairs the tractor. A whole chain of events occurs. In terms of stimulating small business and business activity, in this case the investment allowance has been a quite successful venture. I encourage the government to look closely at furthering it.

An unrelated matter, but something that I would say to the two gentlemen at that table, is that, whilst we are reviewing taxation and incentives, can someone do something about the baby bonus? Surely we can spend that money in a better way than the unfettered way it has been spent, in terms of the encouragement of various activities that the man who has now left the building, Peter Costello, set up to encourage. Surely there has to be a better way of helping families and children than to perpetuate the ridiculous arrangement of paying young people and others $5,000 to have more babies.

In conclusion, I reiterate: talk to the Institute of Chartered Accountants; talk to people who actually understand the mathematics of what is going on in regional and country areas of Australia; make sure that the broadband rollout occurs in a way in which it will actually deliver equity of services. The minister spoke about tradies, et cetera. Minister, you should look very closely at what is happening to TAFE. TAFE is in all our towns. It provides the skills in a lot of our communities. Look closely at what is happening—and this is a continuation of the previous government—and at modelling in terms of competition for certain aspects of the training. In theory that is a good thing. In practice, what it could mean is that a lot of the capacity to train young people in a lot of country towns where TAFE has existed in the past may well be negated by the cherry picking that occurs from time to time with the private sector. I am not saying do not have both, but be careful that we do not, over time, wipe out a service delivery and then have nothing to replace it because it has moved on to other taller cherry trees to pick.

In conclusion, I urge the minister and the government to revisit the theme that occurs from time to time of zonal taxation, and the minister himself would be aware of that. There are drivers of tax policy—the Henry review is coming up—and there are a number of initiatives that that review should look at if we are serious about driving some of the changes needed in country policy. (Time expired)

Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Lyne for proposing this matter of public importance. There are nearly four million Australians engaged and employed in small business, and there are a further 1.2 million non-employing small businesses. About 1.9 million Australians are engaged in small business operations—and I was one of them. At 26 years of age I took a punt and decided to be involved in small business. I was in a legal practice which grew into a very large operation over many years, and I pay tribute to my various partners over the years. But it was a punt. Every day in small business you take a risk—every single day. You do not get any protections; you do not get sick pay; you do not get long service leave or annual leave or penalty rates. You get nothing. Instead, in many ways, you are stuck with red tape and bureaucracy that governments of both persuasions have historically imposed upon small business.

This government recognises the challenges and difficulties of small business, particularly in rural and regional Australia. In my electorate of Blair, which is an electorate of about 5,300 square kilometres, moving up to 6,400 with the redistribution, I am currently servicing about 70 per cent of the city of Ipswich, just about all of the Fassifern Valley, the Lockyer Valley and now the Somerset region. It is a large area. I talk to the farmers and I talk to the small business operators in those areas and I know the challenges.

In my consideration and belief, small business has been advantaged by previous Labor governments. The Whitlam government brought in the Trade Practices Act to give small business a chance to compete against big business. The Trade Practices Act in the 1970s was a very, very important legislative reform. I was involved in cases in my legal practice that saw small business operators advantage themselves through that legislation to help them to enjoy a degree of equality and equalise the power imbalance. The reduction of tariffs, I think, was an important opening-up of the economy. The Hawke and Keating governments floated the dollar, opened up the economy to allow it to become a market-driven economy, allowed the entry of foreign banks into this country, brought in in a really considered way—in consultation with the trade union movement—enterprise bargaining, and brought in for the first time a great national treasure and initiative which was the superannuation scheme which so many Australians benefit from.

Small business is the backbone of our economy. Sadly, those opposite mouth the words that they are on the side of free enterprise—but they are not. The truth is that they are forever on the side of big business, forever on the side of oligopoly, and always have supported high tariff walls of protection which result in high prices for consumers. Open, competitive markets and removing barriers improve the economy and make it fitter and more competitive, and that helps small business. That allows small business to invest. It gives us a chance. The coalition’s idea to help small business was to put upon them the sclerotic burden and rigidity of Work Choices, and of course they imposed the GST on them.

The truth is that we are engaged in a nation-building enterprise. My area has been neglected for many, many years. Indeed, the mayor of Ipswich, Paul Pisasale, often said that the last real, serious investment—until this Rudd government came to power—was in fact the Ipswich Civic Centre in Whitlam’s day. Now we see a massive amount of money injected into the local economy, and that is because of the Nation Building and economic stimulus strategy of the Rudd government—876 projects in the federal electorate of Blair, $203 million, 313 projects in 85 schools. Lest you think that that is just academic, let me tell you what Mal Jacobsen of Paynter Dixon said to me when they were opening up Cabanda Link in Rosewood, which is an aged-care facility which his company was working on, and they were also involved in the Rosewood State Primary School BER funding initiative. He sent me an email indicating that 625 people had jobs by virtue of those two projects—money from this government going into the small community of Rosewood in the rural parts of the city of Ipswich. That is the kind of thing that will help those small business operators in Johns Street, the main street of Rosewood.

We are also seeing thousands of jobs created by the most important infrastructure project in South-East Queensland, in my view, and that is the Ipswich Motorway upgrade. There are 4,000 jobs being created. It is the most important road that leads west of Brisbane. It links into the Warrego Highway, which the member for Maranoa talks about all the time, and the Brisbane Valley Highway, which leads north-west. The truth is that this initiative will make a huge difference to small businesses—the farmers in the Lockyer Valley, the Fassifern Valley and the Somerset region. How can they get their produce to Brisbane on a road that is clogged? They cannot. They have often told me that their produce has decayed because they could not get it there on time. They find that difficult. They cannot get their employees to business appointments in Brisbane because of the infrastructure bottlenecks that were created by the Howard government, with their inertia, inaction and idleness in failing to upgrade the Ipswich Motorway. It is not just the Ipswich Motorway; it is Redbank Plains Road, the Warrego Highway and the Cunningham Highway—important road infrastructure in South-East Queensland—helping small business operators in towns like Kalbar, Boonah, Laidley, Gatton, Esk and Fernvale. This is what government can do to help small business in rural and regional Queensland.

Helping small business can be done in a number of ways; for example, through the $2 million we are giving to Bremer TAFE in Ipswich—a great initiative—and the $10 million from the Better Regions Program to help revitalise the city of Ipswich. Those things are very important—real assistance. I acknowledge also the member for Rankin. The Minister for Small Business, Independent Contractors and the Service Economy is here today. I remembered vividly his coming to the electorate of Blair in the last federal election campaign to announce that we would be funding the Ipswich Business Enterprise Centre. That centre is servicing not just Ipswich; it is part of a $46 million project servicing all those rural areas that I talked about. It involves mentoring and giving advice. It is a one-stop centre, giving assistance, running seminars and helping all those types of operators in those rural areas outside Brisbane and Ipswich. I have spoken to many business operators and people involved in chambers of commerce in those areas, and they warmly acknowledge and applaud the government’s initiative to help small business in their area. Tony Axford, the manager of the Ipswich Business Enterprise Centre, has told me how important he has felt and how warmly he has been received by so many people when he has been running seminars in that area. That is a $1.2 million initiative across many years.

The member for Lyne was talking about Regional Development Australia committees. We have appointed one in the federal electorate of Blair and across Oxley, Forde and Dickson. It is the Ipswich and West Moreton Regional Development Australia committee, looking at big infrastructure projects, what we can do about regional hospitals and what we can do to help small business. We have the Hon. Dr David Hamill as the chair of our local RDA committee. We have Councillor Kathy Benstead from the Scenic Rim area, a great community champion in that area, as the deputy chair, and we have some great people from the rural parts, as well as Ipswich, involved in that project.

I know that the farmers and the small business operators in those rural communities are looking forward to the National Broadband Network being created. That is an important infrastructure project for regional Australia. It is particularly important in terms of e-health. It is important for rural hospitals in places like Boonah, Esk, Laidley and Gatton—not just Ipswich but the rural areas outside it. Making broadband fast and affordable is critical. It will also make us globally competitive. It will help farmers in those rural areas. It will make sure that people who live in Kalbar will have the same rights to operate as the people who live in Melbourne; the people who live in Boonah the same as Brisbane; the people who live in Laidley the same as Adelaide. It is helping small business operators and farming communities, and I warmly commend that program.

I thank the member for Lyne for bringing forward this matter of public importance. It is terrific that he has raised this issue. It is very important for all our areas. (Time expired)

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The previous speaker spoke about the free market policies being wonderful for us. Honestly, I do not know how these people can come in and make such stupid statements! In the motor car industry, we had 72 per cent of the market before Keating started on this stupidity, which was completed by—

Shayne Neumann (Blair, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Neumann interjecting

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Don’t claim the credit for it, because you must share the credit for it with Costello. You must share the blame. From 72 per cent, we dropped down to 14 per cent. Hardly any motor cars are produced in Australia now—no stoves, no fridges, no anything. And you are telling us it is a good thing. You say it is good for the consumers. Do you know what the price of a car was in 1984? Do you know what it is today? I will tell you. It is nearly 70 per cent higher in real terms. There is the outcome for your consumers.

I am very interested in the outcome for the consumers and for small businesses—because that is what our farmers are—after the deregulatory policies that came in. For a litre of milk, the farmer and the factory get 65c and the retailer gets $2. That is a Coles docket. This is after deregulation. Was it good in the field of sugar, something we use every day, or every second day, of our lives? The farmer and the miller get 39c and the retailer gets $1.35. Is this a good outcome for the consumers? With potatoes, the farmer gets 62c and the retailer gets $2.46. Is that a good outcome? These are all small business men, these farmers. With eggs, the farmer gets $1.40 and the retailer gets $4.85. That is a 230 per cent mark-up. The last speaker said this was wonderful for us.

Pre deregulation, three of those were on a fairness tribunal, the same as the arbitration commission. When we had our own arbitration commission, there was only an 80 per cent mark-up. The farmers benefited and the consumers benefited. Under this disastrous free market regime, the big sharks eat the little fishes. That is the outcome. That is the outcome for Holden motor cars and that is the outcome for food in Australia.

I very strongly back the member for Lyne in saying that the small business tax breaks and the investment allowance should stay. They are absolutely, dramatically important for people. In Queensland, Woolworths and Coles have run amok. Two publicans in my hometown of Cloncurry said to me, ‘If you want to close down a town, bring Woolworths and Coles to it.’ What is the state government doing about this? The federal government has done nothing to restrain Woolworths and Coles. The last federal government was in power for 13 years, and its members get up in this place and have the hypocrisy to talk about being for small business. You smashed small business in your 13 years of government. In 1991 Coles and Woolworths had 50.5 per cent of the marketplace—that is all they had. After you had completed your work, Woolworths and Coles had 76.7 per cent in 2002. According to their own figures, they now have 85 per cent of the market—and you congratulate yourselves on that.

I will tell you what happened on the ground in my hometown of Cloncurry. We owned a row of shops in the town. There were four businesses, with our business making that five businesses located in these shops. Where those five businesses used to stand, only one business stands now. That is all that is left. The two publicans said, ‘If you want to close down a town, bring Woolworths and Coles to it.’ We brought in Woolworths and they closed everything in the town. There is not a single business left in the town. I like to walk in the streets of small country towns when I am campaigning, and in Cloncurry there are no doors to businesses for me to knock on. They have all gone—service stations, butchers shops. Everything has gone. That is what happens to a town.

Woolworths and Coles are now applying for 24-hour trading at Mission Beach and Mount Isa and half the other towns in Queensland. It is not enough for them to have 85 per cent of the marketplace. They want everything. There is no limit to their greed. Is there any limitation placed on them by this House? It is a disgrace. In a so-called inquiry by this place, the nearest country in the world had 22 per cent share of the marketplace. In Australia, Woolworths and Coles hold 85 per cent, and they are about to be given 24-hour trading in places like Mount Isa and Mission Beach. My son is on the council in Mount Isa. When he was rung up about this situation, he said, ‘If you want two doors left to walk through in Mount Isa then agree to 24-hour trading because that will be all that is left in a town of 26,000 people. The only businesses that will be left there will be Woolworths and Coles.’ (Time expired)

Darren Cheeseman (Corangamite, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak about the importance of small business in regional and rural Australia. Small businesses and independent contractors are the backbone of a number of our rural communities and regional centres, including my own region of Corangamite. Small businesses are today the powerhouse of our region, with Corangamite now having more small businesses than the neighbouring seat of Corio, which takes in the vast bulk of the City of Geelong. It is no coincidence that small business has grown in our region and the strength of our economy has grown with their dominance. Today, we have one of the best performing regions in Australia.

Even in normal economic conditions, small business enterprises need to work very hard to achieve commercial success. Each small business takes a risk in going out on their own—especially those who are self-employed take that risk. In the current economic climate, the difficulty in maintaining a small business has been dramatically exacerbated. This government’s sound economic management has Australia leading the world out of the global financial crisis—and that has been a great outcome for small business.

With the Rudd government’s decisive economic policies, the Australian economy is now the envy of the world. We are the first developed economy to emerge from the global financial crisis. Much of this resilience in the Australian economy has been because of the strength of the small business sector. However, we as a government are not going to rest on our laurels. We still have a long way to go. The rest of the world is still caught in the worst economic depression since the Great Depression of the 1930s. Nearly every major world economy is still in recession.

The Rudd government took decisive and early action to protect the economy for small businesses and independent contractors. The government’s economic stimulus packages were designed to assist small business; they were squarely in our mind. Local small business, especially retailers, have benefited from the cash stimulus payments to families, the stimulus spending on materials for school building projects and the other public infrastructure projects. Tradespeople, independent contractors and other small business people are the beneficiaries of 70 per cent of the stimulus package that was spent on infrastructure, including the biggest school modernisation program in the nation’s history.

Local economies have also benefited from the housing grants, bringing new home buyers to our regions. The government understands that cash flow is clearly very important for small business. We are assisting in that regard with pay-as-you-go instalments for small business through 2009-10. To support small businesses this summer, the Rudd government is also providing $100 million in the form of the Apprentice Kickstart program. The Apprentice Kickstart program is a part of the government’s economic stimulus package and is designed to support up to 21,000 young Australians entering traditional trades. Between 1 December 2009 and 28 February 2010, the Australian government will provide a $3,350 Apprentice Kickstart Bonus to employers, small businesses, who take on young persons aged 19 years and under into a traditional trade—(Time expired)

Mal Washer (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The discussion has concluded.