Joanne Ryan (Lalor, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That this House:

(1) notes the importance of investing in local communities to assist them in meeting future challenges and seizing future opportunities;

(2) acknowledges that the Regional Development Australia Fund (RDAF) Round 5 and 5b commitments, which were announced and budgeted for by the former government, were an opportunity for regional communities to address their challenges of growth whilst also providing economic activity and job creation;

(3) recognises that the withdrawal of these funding commitments will adversely affect every local council across Australia that was relying on the RDAF Round 5 and 5b funding; and

(4) calls on the government to immediately reinstate the funding as previously promised and budgeted for, thereby enabling communities to continue with certainty the projects they so desperately need.

Last week on 11 March, my office was contacted by several Tarneit residents concerned after reading the local paper. They were ringing to convey their dismay that the planned library would not receive the $1.05 million promised by the federal government. I was surprised to learn in the same article that the responsible minister had confirmed to a local journalist that the funds would not be delivered as budgeted. On the same day, my office received a letter addressed to me from the Minister for Infrastructure and Regional Development, the member for Wide Bay. It was in response to a letter I had written requesting confirmation of federal government funding for the new Tarneit library. It was dated 28 February, but it seems it took a full nine days for the post to get to Werribee from Canberra.

The letter was in response to a letter I had sent to both the member for Wide Bay and the member for Mayo on 31 October last year. I, like the residents of Tarneit, learned of the decision from the local paper because the member for Wide Bay, the Deputy Prime Minister and Leader of the National Party, took a full four months to respond to my letter. In those four months, another 500 houses have been built in the growth suburb of Tarneit. In those four months, the population of Tarneit has grown by another 790 people. In those four months, a school year has gone and a new one begun, with more and more students needing access to books. The local students at Tarneit college are doubly disadvantaged because their school has no library either. The need for the Abbott government to honour the commitment to fund Tarneit library becomes more urgent every day.

The infrastructure minister, however, has decided to cut government funding for the Tarneit library. He explained the funding cuts in these terms: 'The government has announced that it does not propose to fund projects announced by the former government. These projects were election promises and naturally do not bind the incoming government.' This is simply not true. The funding was approved and budgeted for before the election campaign had begun. I note the minister recommends 'another two funds the government has set up' and suggests that they may be a source of future funding for the Tarneit library project. In short, he is suggesting that the city of Wyndham reapply for the same money for the same project. Correct me if I am wrong, Deputy Speaker, but is this not coming from the same government that proudly assert they are here to cut red tape? How is reapplying for the same grant a second time cutting red tape?

Tarneit is one of the fastest-growing communities in Melbourne—a suburb of Wyndham, the third-fastest-growing local government area in the country. In Tarneit there are more than 9,990 households, 5,700 residents from non-English speaking backgrounds and 7,500 people currently attending an educational institution. Tarneit's population grew between 2007 and 2012 by 15,000 people, a staggering 295 per cent increase. Tarneit needs vital services and infrastructure yesterday. All the research says that kids who are read to have better literacy outcomes. This is incontestable and the reason that libraries are so important in a growing community. Last week I spoke to a council officer who told me that the neighbouring Point Cook library run a zero-to-two book session for 17 babies and that just last week 50 children were present with their parents for a session. That is one clear example of the demand and oversubscription in Lalor. As you can see, this library has already had huge support from the community and in turn the library supports the community.

The city of Wyndham has done its part. It is time the federal government honoured its part of this bargain. Providing services such as a public library is precisely what government is for. It could not be more clear: this community desperately needs this library. A community member only last Friday said to me: 'We need this library, Joanne. My children are spending 45 minutes on a bus just to get to the closest library and then 45 minutes home again.' If you are serious about cutting red tape, do not make the city of Wyndham reapply for funding that has already been granted and budgeted for. Do not make them write yet another submission. Do not make them collate yet more data. The growth pattern in Lalor is clear. The Tarneit library is clearly a priority for local council. The need is incontestable and the positive outcomes all but guaranteed. I would strongly urge the federal government to support this library, to fund the $1.05 million as promised before the election.

Natasha Griggs (Solomon, Country Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Is the motion seconded?

Graham Perrett (Moreton, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I second the motion.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I share the member for Lalor's disappointment about her important school library which is not being funded. I might add that last Friday in The Area News, the Griffith newspaper, there was a report headed 'Costly Griffith theatre upgrade moved forward'. It said:

COUNCIL has been forced to outlay hundreds of thousands of dollars to refurbish dilapidated seats and unsafe carpet being held together with tape at the Griffith Regional Theatre

Council has been forced to find the refurbishment costs of $321,368, which would revitalise the theatre. That was part of the round 5 RDAF funding, which did not materialise. I could go through the 13 local government areas that I represent—Bland, Carrathool, Coolamon, Griffith, Gundagai, Junee, Leeton, Murrumbidgee, Narrandera, Temora, Tumbarumba, Tumut and Wagga Wagga local government areas—all of which were going to be receiving some $3,225,981 in funding under the Regional Development Australia Fund round 5. Then I could mention the half a million dollars going to Griffith Post School Options as part of round 5B, which also promised half a million dollars to an outreach service at Narrandera. These are all really worthwhile funds. I must admit that I agree with the member for Lalor: I am really disappointed that they are not going to be funded.

But at the start of the member for Lalor's speech she talked about the responsible minister, and that is the difference. I am not quite sure what context she meant, but certainly the minister is very responsible. The reason he is responsible is that you cannot fund things that you do not have the money for, and the whole premise of RDAF rounds 5 and 5B was based on the minerals resource rent tax, which only retrieved a fraction of the money that underpinned Labor's last budget. You cannot just find money that is not there, Member for Lalor.

Ms Ryan interjecting—

Natasha Griggs (Solomon, Country Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Member for Lalor, you have had your turn.

Michael McCormack (Riverina, National Party, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On 9 December 2013, the responsible minister wrote to all mayors throughout Australia advising of the government's decision. It is unfortunate, but the money is just not there. RDAF was designed by the former government as a $952 million seven-year program to run from 2011-12 through to 2017-18. Two and a quarter years on, from July 2011 to the election on 7 September last year, Labor had promised all but $35 million of that RDAF funding, so 97 per cent of the money had already been promised based on this false premise that the MRRT was going to produce these wonderful rivers of wealth, which we all know did not happen.

I share your disappointment about your school library and about the local government areas in your electorate. Mind you, you would have benefited from one of the RDAF rounds, because they transformed it from being regional—and I view 'regional' as meaning part of Dawson, Riverina or one of those other good bush or country electorates, not peri-urban electorates. Labor mysteriously and miraculously, as they had a wont to do, changed the rules. Last year the member for Hotham, Simon Crean, the former minister for regional development, tried to make the Gillard government fess up to all their sins and lost his job over it. Then the member for Grayndler, Anthony Albanese, took over and he announced this funding on 19 June, and I welcomed it—$3.2 million for Riverina. More than 500 local government areas throughout Australia were going to benefit from it. But, just weeks on from the member for Grayndler taking over as the minister, we had Catherine King, the member for Ballarat, taking over. It was just shuffling the deckchairs on the Titanic.

That goes to show the lack of respect that Labor had for regional areas and for the really important funding announcements that were so needed, like the library in Lalor, Post School Options in Griffith in my electorate, the Khancoban Swimming Pool, the Griffith Regional Theatre and the Roxy Community Theatre at Leeton—all worthwhile projects. A lot of my local government areas put all the money into one funding bucket and some others had different projects, such as Tumbarumba Shire, but they all really needed that money. But the money was never there, because the MRRT gained only a fraction of what Labor thought it might.

Labor knew they would never have to deliver on their promises. That is why they sent Catherine King, the member for Ballarat, around just days out from the election promising this, that and everything else, particularly in National Party electorates. It is really galling to some of those small volunteer groups and vulnerable people to think that they were going to get something that was based on a false premise, and that is the MRRT. It was typical Labor spin.

Cathy McGowan (Indi, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak in support of the member for Lalor. In particular, I wish to report to the House the disappointment that the people of Indi have expressed regarding the withdrawal of funding commitments under the Regional Development Australia fund rounds A and B. The allocation of funding under rounds A and B was an investment in rural and regional communities. It enabled growth, created jobs and provided certainty for desperately needed community projects. Many of these projects have an important safety focus, particularly road infrastructure. People in Indi are most disappointed that proposed RDA funding for road black spots will not go ahead.

I have spoken to a number of key stakeholders responsible for the rollout of RDA projects in my electorate. They have expressed bewilderment that the RDA funding system has been abolished. They tell me that the system was efficient, easy to use and that it funded projects that would otherwise not have been prioritised for funding. Two weeks ago, in this place, I spoke about the good work the Hume RDA committee does in Indi. Their leadership and research has had a significant impact on the planning and implementation of essential projects in my region.

Under rounds 5A and 5B, Indi was due to receive in excess of $7.3 million in RDA funding. I want to list the projects that missed out. They were: the Wodonga City heart redevelopment at $5.86 million, the Wodonga Tennis Centre court redevelopment at $343,000, Rutherglen Main Street at $284,000, Wangaratta Saleyards upgrade at $410,000, Mount Beauty Progressing Place at $247,000 and Mansfield Daisy Street construction and car park at $192,000. These projects represent significant community and volunteer input as well as the time and money of the councils of Indi.

In speaking to this motion I would also like to voice my support for the RDA decision-making process. It worked. It was efficient. It was trusted. It had legitimacy. It created effective networks. It delivered high-value, great outcomes and, most importantly of all, there was no red tape. One of the reasons this process worked so well was the extent of consultation that took place prior to its establishment. Community members were involved, as were NGO groups such as Australian Women in Agriculture, business groups, local government, community agencies and state government departments. We argued and we debated. We worked in great cooperation to design a system that would deliver for all our rural and regional communities.

We know that this government wants to leave a legacy as an infrastructure government. This is a noble aim and it has my total support. However, a critical first step is to build on what works and to avoid the temptation to dismantle well-established and respected processes just for the sake of change. My constituents tell me that the RDA scheme works, and works well. It gave councils confidence to plan and gave them processes to engage with all stakeholders. It had a belief in long-term sustainable development and, for our communities, there was an ability to proactively develop rural and regional areas for the future.

In closing, I echo the words of the members of Lalor. I call on the government to reinstate RDA funding right across the country. This funding is important for the future development of rural and regional areas, in particular—including Indi. I believe that the abolishment of this funding will cause us to miss infrastructure opportunities. It will cause the loss of economic activity and job-creation opportunities that our rural and regional areas desperately need. I ask that the government truly value the work and the knowledge of our councils and reinstate a program similar to what is currently working for our local government areas. Finally, I call on the government as a matter of urgency to reinstate funding, thereby enabling communities to continue to plan and develop our regional centres to ensure their viability for our future.

George Christensen (Dawson, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This motion notes the importance of investing in local communities to assist them in meeting future challenges and seizing future opportunities. That is very commendable indeed. But the motion then goes on to talk about funding commitments under the Regional Development Australia Fund. What it does not mention is the term 'unfunded Labor election promises', which is exactly what these so-called Regional Development Australia funding commitments, made during the election campaign, actually were.

With all due respect to the previous speaker, the member for Indi, the Regional Development Australia Fund was anything but well established and anything but respected in the community. In fact, both from my local RDA and from local councils the response has been that it was chaotic, that it was inconsistent, that every round was different and that councils and applicants simply did not know what the rules were when they went to apply. That was the experience of local organisations and local councils and indeed the feedback from my local RDA.

I note that the motion claims rounds 5 and 5B of the RDA Fund were announced and budgeted. Well, that is half right. Projects were announced; they were announced during the middle of an election campaign. Along with making their various other announcements, Labor also tried to claim that these were not election promises and that the projects were 'already funded' or 'already in the budget'. For example, in my electorate the Labor candidate issued a press release on 19 August 2013, two weeks after the election had been called—well and truly into caretaker mode—with this promise:

A re-elected Rudd Labor Government will provide federal funding towards the upgrade of Whitsunday Coast Airport …

Labor's press release then goes on to put a caveat on this $10 million promise, saying that the federal government's commitment was contingent upon the Whitsunday Regional Council providing the required additional funding. Well, the required additional funding, according to the original application, was a further $5 million. So not only was it an election promise; it was an election promise with a huge caveat—one that would have seen a $290 increase in rates bills across the Whitsundays.

But wait. Labor's press release then goes on to make this claim about their promise: that the commitment would have been delivered through the government's Regional Development Australia Fund and was already included in the budget. Well, I looked through the budget for this and many other announcements, and they were not in the budget at all. There was no line item in the budget that announced $10 million for the Whitsunday airport or any of the other programs or projects funded through the RDA. There was not even a mention in a media release that these programs were going to be funded. Just like all of these Labor promises, there were no line items, no mention in the budget. If those opposite were so convinced about funding these projects, they would have made the deal earlier and they would have had it in the budget—or at least in a press release that came out when the budget was delivered only three months earlier.

So what changed in those three months? We had another sitting Labor Prime Minister knifed in the back. We had bad polling by the government at the time—bad enough to knife the Prime Minister and run around the country making spur-of-the-moment election promises, trying to pass them off as already funded projects that were in the budget. That just does not cut it, and neither did their promise to fund a library in the northern beaches and Mackay. It was another project that was contingent on funding from local government. But this so-called second coming of the Rudd government also promised funding for this northern beaches library just four days before calling the election. Only two months earlier they brought down their budget, and that was not mentioned in it. It was not even mentioned in a press release emanating from the budget.

So it is quite clear that these were election commitments. In fact, I spoke to the then Deputy Prime Minister about them, and he told me that the advice from the head of the department was that these were being treated by the department as election promises by the Labor Party. You cannot get more impartial advice than that, and that was the advice from the department.

I will be encouraging all my local councils, and I would ask the mover of the motion and the member for Indi and all others to encourage their councils, to reapply for these projects through a proper program that we will establish, called Stronger Regions. It will be available in 2015, and it will not be some fairytale pot of money that is linked to a mining tax that is not actually raising anything. It will be a proper program—real funding. That is what responsible governments do; that is what grown-up governments do. What this motion comes down to is a scorned Labor Party upset because its election promises are not being delivered by us on this side. We would not require them to deliver our election promises if they were elected and they should not require us to do it either.

Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I would like to congratulate the member for Lalor on bringing this important motion to the House and I would like to congratulate the member for Indi for her contribution to the debate. They both show that they really understand what regional grants are about. This is unlike speakers on the other side, who just seem committed to going back to the old days of the Regional Solutions program or, should I say, the 'regional rorts project' that in my area saw the then government funding—

An opposition member: Tumbi Umbi Creek.

Tumbi Umbi Creek! Yes, which was actually flushed out by the rain.

This program was a project that had a high level of accountability. It was very transparent; for any project to be funded it had to pass the highest level of scrutiny. This is unlike the previous Regional Solutions program where it just depended on whether you were a mate of the government of the day to get funded.

I am very disappointed about a program funded in my area—and I might add that the funding for these projects was allocated in the budget, well and truly before the election period; any project that was announced was signed off before the government went into caretaker mode. So these were not promises; these were funded projects. The project in my area that I am so disappointed about is the Gulgul Barang project that was to be run in conjunction with the Darkinjung Aboriginal people and local community groups.

It was a fantastic project, because it was a whole-of-community effort. The Darkinjung Local Aboriginal Land Council donated the land and sat down in conjunction with the San Remo Neighbourhood Centre, the Central Coast Medicare Local, Youth Connections, ET Australia and the local advisory group, Better Futures, Local Solutions, and came up with this project.

The northern part of Wyong shire has absolutely no facilities whatsoever. The Wyong Shire Council tends to ignore the fact that there are people up there who really need resources and services that they can use. This was a recognition of the fact that people in that area do not have any training facilities and do not have anywhere that they can meet or use as a hub. This new centre was to be an innovative learning hub for the whole of the area. It was going to deliver community based health care, training and skills development and also community and cultural engagement. There was going to be an arts precinct to encourage local artists, cultural presentations and also an iDialogue cafe to set up a digital connectivity community.

There was broad based consultation with community groups and a lot of work had already been done. The DA was about to be presented and considerable financial costs had been incurred by the Darkinjung Local Aboriginal Land Council because there was a high level of commitment to this project, which was really needed in the area. Then we had the coalition government elected and they have walked away from it. They have walked away from the people in the northern part of the Central Coast and shown that they have no commitment to the people in the Shortland electorate.

On the other hand, they agreed to fund projects that were in Liberal-held electorates and which were announced prior to the election. They stand condemned for the fact that they are ignoring the needs of the northern part of Wyong Shire Council, the southern part of Shortland electorate, and the people will judge them accordingly. We need resources there. This was a community project that was developed with strong partnerships between a number of different groups. I strongly support the motion that is before the House today, moved by the member for Lalor.

Sarah Henderson (Corangamite, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As a member of parliament representing a large regional electorate in Victoria, I believe the administration of the Regional Development Australia Fund by the previous Labor government was utterly inadequate. I take issue with the member for Indi, who talked about how well run the RDA Fund was. As we discovered after the election, with project after project, contracts were left to languish. With projects announced under rounds 2, 3 and 4, some 53 projects were left unfunded, with no contracts signed and no intention by the previous government to deliver.

In the case of one project, I spoke to a local council and they were shunted from departmental officer to departmental officer. It was an exasperating and frustrating process. In the case of a round 5 project in my region in Geelong, the project did not even go to the RDA board. The Barwon South West RDA board is meant to review and scrutinise all projects—and I think this is an important point to make to the member for Indi—and it was absolutely disgraceful that the board never saw the project before it was announced by Labor. Yes, there were plenty of announcements, but, when it came to delivery we saw Labor incompetence time after time. In my electorate of Corangamite there was a funding announcement of $4.17 million for a great project, the Golden Plains intensive agriculture project. This was a very important project and one that we have now fixed. Since being elected, in so many respects for these projects we have fixed Labor's mess. We are proudly funding that project and many others, which will deliver 775 jobs over 10 years and generate $160 million worth of investment. In many cases, we had to go in there and fix Labor's mess. But in relation to round 5 projects, the subject of this motion, what we have seen from Labor is no intention, in many respects, to actually even proceed.

An opposition member: Rubbish!

I hear the interjection 'Rubbish!' Well, it is not rubbish, and I will tell you why. The caretaker period was announced on 6 August, and in my electorate all the projects were announced in the caretaker period. Where is the intention to fund the projects? The government is prohibited from entering into a funding agreement during the caretaker period, so it is an unfunded election promise. There were some very good projects—the Torquay North Family and Children's Centre project; the Banyul-Warri Fields stage 2 soccer facility lighting project; 'Lighting the Way' in the Queenscliffe borough; the Smythesdale business and wellbeing hub extension; and the Moorabool Street Bike Safe project, the one that Bike Safe pushed very hard for. There was no intention by Labor to deliver. If there had been an intention, guess what Labor would have done. It would have announced the projects and ensured that the agreements were signed. So it was simply an election commitment. But what is even worse is that, at the time these projects were announced, Labor announced they were fully funded and they would be delivered. That was not only misleading; it was a complete misrepresentation. So again we have seen utter incompetence by Labor in the way in which these projects have been delivered.

I remind the chamber here today that we are proudly committing to regional Australia in a whole range of different aspects. We have a very important Stronger Regions Fund—$200 million per year for five years. We have not said that these round 5 projects will not be considered, but we do require them to be resubmitted with proper governance and proper diligence so that we do not see—and I particularly make reference to the member for Indi—the sort of failure of governance and the sort of incompetence that we saw in relation to one particular project which never even went to the RDA board. That is an absolute disgrace. So there is $200 million a year over five years, $300 million for the new bridges renewal program and $16 billion for major regional roads. We are very proud of the commitment that we are making to regional Australia.

Debate adjourned.

Proceedings suspended from 13:35 to 17:45