Steven Ciobo's recent appearances (OpenAustralia.org)
Valedictory | Statements on Indulgence | House debates
I first stood in this chamber on Wednesday, 13 February 2002 to deliver my first speech. I was the 40th Member of Parliament under age 30 since Federation. Now, some 17 years, one month and 22...
I first stood in this chamber on Wednesday, 13 February 2002 to deliver my first speech. I was the 40th Member of Parliament under age 30 since Federation. Now, some 17 years, one month and 22 days later, it's my privilege to rise for the final time in this chamber. I posed the question in my first speech: what is our purpose? It was my intention to outline a road map for my period in this place, a charter to which both I and others could hold me to account, to anchor my decisions and actions in this building to the service of my electors in the pursuit of good government. I spoke of Edmund Burke's observation: Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion. And, although I said at the time I was not a starry-eyed idealist, I think it's fair to say I have always struggled more with the pragmatic side of politics, preferring instead to stay the course on the idealistic. For me, I always preferred the warmth of the roaring philosophical fire to the early-morning flicker of the pragmatic. Much has changed in the 17½ years I have been entrusted with the privilege of serving in this place. The Gold Coast's population has nearly doubled in the past two decades. We have seen the rise and rise of China. Innovation, smartphones, the digital economy, social media and automation have all advanced with extraordinary pace. There was no Facebook, no Twitter, no Instagram, no Snapchat in 2001, but many other things have not changed. In 2001, I joined the Howard government in the task of paying down Labor's debt binge through prudent economic management. For nearly six years, I was a member of a coalition government that weathered Labor's attacks as they labelled us callous, inequitable, unfair and hard-hearted because we refused to leave the tax-and-spend taps open. I then watched Labor inflict economic damage for six years as they spent and spent and spent, all justified by necessity in their mind because of the GFC. Of course, there was little intellectual honesty, that our major trading partners were driving their economies and powering our economy. And, of course, there was the wastefulness of Labor's spending, from pink batts to cash for clunkers to cash handouts, and school halls for every school, even if they didn't want them. It is little wonder we witnessed our nation's finances deteriorate through tens of billions of dollars of deficit while, at the same time, Labor held that they were delivering year after year of surpluses. Then, thanks to Tony Abbott and the united team, the coalition was re-elected and the economic and fiscal discipline began again. It culminated earlier this week when the coalition, led by the Treasurer—my friend of two decades, the member for Kooyong—delivered the first budget surplus since the last one delivered by the coalition in 2007. And again Labor snipes that we are callous, inequitable, unfair and hard-hearted. I've seen all of this before. I am confident that if Labor is elected we will sadly find our country mired again in deficit, with Labor finding excuse after excuse to justify it. Australia simply cannot afford Labor's big-taxing, big-spending agenda. Labor talks about equity constantly but they deliver shocking generational inequity as they lumber Australia's next generation with the responsibility of paying for Labor's sweeping gesture policies. Campaigning back in 2001 was very different. I think it's fair to say that my first campaign was a little bumpy. The outgoing member for Moncrieff was suing me for $200,000 for defamation and left me with the princely sum of around $1,300 in the campaign account. And in a city where the main industry and employer is the tourism industry, Ansett Airlines collapsed the day after the September 11 terrorist attack. But we prevailed, through a dedicated team of volunteers and a small band of donors, wonderful party loyalists and supporters like Graham Ward, Jack and Fay Doherty, Winifred, Leer and Marion, many of them now deceased. They were there at the beginning and the I don't forget their contributions and support. Those who have followed my political career—which I guess is mainly confined to my family members—would have seen some early evidence of my special gift of successfully always picking the person who had come second in any political contest. As a new MP, at 27, my choice to strongly back Peter Costello over John Howard in some of the leadership tensions made sense. After all, John Howard had been Prime Minister for six years—it was only a matter of time! With that strong start, the world was my oyster. With only a couple of exceptions, it was a record of success that for most of the past 17 or 18 years I was always able to pick and back the person who had come second—the stuff of legend. As my good mates, the members for Stirling and Dickson, the former members for Mayo, Jamie Briggs, and North Sydney, Joe Hockey, would all shift uncomfortably and find fascinating patterns on their shoes to look at whenever they found themselves backing the same aspirant as me in a contest. It was like a reverse Sleeping Beauty fairytale. My kiss would put a person to political sleep for 100 years. Notwithstanding this talent, I can reflect on the past 17½ years and feel a real sense of pride in what I feel I've been able to achieve and to be a part of. In the early 2000s, I was pleased to run with the rebadged 'ginger group', together with Senator Fifield and the former member for Indi, Sophie Mirabella, to agitate for substantial personal income tax relief and the passage of voluntary student unionism. One of my proudest was the campaign I ran, at some personal political cost, against the government's plan for the access card—little more than a national ID card with more costs to personal liberties and the individual-state relationship than any purported benefits. I've been pleased to drive some of the very first calls for the revocation of dual citizenship of terrorists and their supporters, as well as the cashless welfare card in the early 2000s. Over the past six years, as a frontbencher I've had the extraordinary privilege of helping to shape our nation's engagement with the world. I particularly want to thank former Prime Ministers Abbott and Turnbull, as well as Prime Minister Morrison, for their faith and trust in me to steward the various portfolios that I've held. As Joe Hockey's parliamentary secretary in the Treasury portfolio, we worked so well together and executed a flawless G20 finance ministers' stream. I quickly learnt of the relationship between a junior minister and a senior minister when it came to work dispersal and announcements, and I'm able to say I was able to carry that early lesson and put it into good effect in my most recent role in the Defence portfolio! As alternative governor to the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, it was heartening to see the world work together to focus on development issues, especially the provision of infrastructure across our region, to help improve the lives of millions of people. I was pleased that we strongly backed the initiative to join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the AIIB—again, not without some robust internal discussion. As parliamentary secretary to both Julie, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, and Andrew, the Minister for Trade and Investment, I was exposed to the critical interplay between our development and engagement initiatives and our trade and investment relationships. This, too, held me in good stead for subsequent roles. As Minister for International Development and the Pacific, the first for our nation, I was able to steward our relationship with our near South Pacific neighbours. I remember running my eye over the rather lengthy list of recommended inoculations and the subsequent injections I had before commencing sojourns in the Pacific. That said, on each trip, accompanied as I was by the members for Forrest and Ryan and my Labor shadow, the important work Australia performs together with New Zealand in the Pacific region was evident. I firmly believed Australia's national interest was best served by presenting a strong show of bipartisanship in the region. For that reason, I always insisted on having the shadow minister present for most of the engagements. The highlight of my period in this place though was the extraordinary honour afforded to me to serve as Australia's Minister for Trade, Tourism and Investment. I pay particular tribute to my predecessor in that regard, the former member for Goldstein Andrew Robb, who was a strong advocate for me to replace him in the role. We still catch up semi-regularly, and it's fair to say we share a similar view of how Australia should engage with the world. Following in Andrew's footsteps was no easy feat. He had finalised critical trade deals with China, Japan and Korea, and the economic impact of those deals will be felt for decades. But I was determined to control the narrative, so I highlighted that Andrew had picked the low-hanging fruit and left the hard ones for me! I launched myself into the role, drawing on my experience as Minister for International Development and the Pacific. I was pleased to successfully conclude negotiations on the Pacific area close economic relations, or PACER Plus agreement. This was followed shortly thereafter by launching and concluding a comprehensive FTA with Peru. Without divulging any cabinet secrets, as I tabled those agreements before cabinet, it caused my good friend the then Attorney-General former Senator Brandis to note, 'Ciobo's more of a small-country specialist.' In the years that followed in the role, I was pleased to pursue a number of other critical agreements. The work that was done over a number of years—and carried, I think it's very fair to say, by the relationship between the former Prime Minister Turnbull and myself, together with President Widodo and my counterpart Minister Lukita—saw, most recently in August-September last year, the successful conclusion of negotiations around the IA-CEPA, or the Indonesia-Australia Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement. I pursued this agreement with the most vigour of all, because I know that this agreement, the FTA with Indonesia, will be an absolute game changer for this nation. It will ensure that one of our closest neighbours, one of the fastest-growing economies in the world and a country with which Australia will have a very strong and important strategic future, will be brought to bear as a consequence of putting in place this high-quality agreement. I implore Labor to put aside any concerns that they have, in particular around ISDS clauses in that agreement, to recognise that to focus on that, which more than anything else protects Australian businesses, would be to lose sight of the much bigger picture about the value of this agreement in our bilateral agreement. Likewise, I was very focused on making sure that we concluded a deal with Hong Kong. Goods into Hong Kong were tariff-free, but we were able to lock that at zero going forward. But the key with the Hong Kong deal was to focus on the access that we could have around services. In that respect, opening up that market and all that flows from that, particularly with respect to mainland China, was also critical. I was so pleased to see Senator Birmingham conclude and sign that deal only a matter of a week or two ago in Sydney. I pushed throughout Latin America, recognising the real potential of Latin America with respect to Australia diversifying its economic interests. We know our major trading partners lie in this region, but that just reinforces why we need to ensure the continued diversification of our export markets, and in that respect Latin America is critical. Commencing a free trade agreement with the Pacific Alliance—the countries of Colombia, Mexico, Chile and Peru—was absolutely critical. That agreement too, I'm pleased to say, is very, very near conclusion and very possibly will be concluded before the end of this year. I was pleased with my counterpart Liam Fox to commence and put in place the very first working group for a comprehensive FTA post-Brexit with the UK. This, of course, would represent a return in many respects to not only a critical market for Australia but also a market of tremendous potential, especially for our high-quality agricultural products and, in particular, wine. The UK—once they find their pathway forward from Brexit—will represent a crucial market for Australia. I was pleased that I was able to position Australia to be at the very front of the queue when it comes to concluding that FTA, likewise putting in place the necessary requirements around the scoping document and feasibility study to commence negotiations for an FTA with the European Union. This will take some time. Any negotiation with the European Union takes time, as the Brits will attest. But, that notwithstanding, the opportunity with what is our single biggest export market, aside from China, will be a very important agreement and one that will hold, again, this nation's diversified export potential at its very core for decades to come. Another critical aspect that I was very pleased to be able to conclude successfully was the CPTPP, or the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. This agreement came off the back of the then defunct TPP, delivered by my predecessor, Andrew Robb, but thwarted by the decision that President Trump made with respect to the United States. To have been able to pull it together—notwithstanding the odd curveball from the Canadians—meant that we were able to cement in place one of the most comprehensive, far-reaching and ambitious trade agreements, through the CPTPP, that Australia will ever face. I spent years working on pulling that back together. Again, I want to acknowledge the incredible work that was done by all leaders which we, as trade ministers, had the good fortune to lock into place. On the tourism front, I was pleased to see incredible inbound numbers and spend by tourists. I was pleased to launch, for the very first time, a nation brand working group, headed by Andrew Forrest, to drive a brand for this country that we know can make sure that Australia represents itself under one banner globally. The conclusion of that nation brand will help to ensure that our country is recognised not only for its high quality agricultural exports but also for its services exports and the attractiveness of the tourism industry. I note as well that we were able to do so recognising that we wanted to grow not just numbers but spend, and spend into this country has been growing at more than nine per cent per annum for the past several years. We took some risks. Of course, the launch of the 'son of Dundee' campaign in the US around Super Bowl was a big political risk. I think it's fair to say that a number of tourism ministers before me had less success when it came to new tourism marketing campaigns for this country, and I learned some lessons from their experiences. But I'm pleased to say that we have seen, now, the fruit from that investment, with growth from the United States in particular being incredibly strong. It's a crucial industry, in particular, for my city of the Gold Coast. I want to thank the party supporters who put me in this place. I've made the comment at numerous party events that, but for the support of the party membership, their faith in me and their privilege of pre-selecting me, I wouldn't have been able to stand in this chamber for the past 17½ years. I want to, in particular, thank Lynda Woods, my FDC chairman. Lynda has been an absolute staple for me and for the party in Moncrieff for well over a decade, and I want to thank her in particular for the support that she has provided me—likewise, Viv and Di Grayson, and the now deceased Mike Milosevic and his wife, Donna. I want to thank all of those who worked on pre-polls, standing there for weeks on end providing support, and of course those who were there from the very beginning, Lee Benjamin and Arthur Chrenkoff, who played such a critical role from their time in the Young Liberals supporting me in my very first preselection. I want to acknowledge the Young Liberals as well. I've always believed they are such a critical foundation stone for our party's future. The Gold Coast Young Liberals have been a part of my life since I was 18 years old and will continue to be. I thank each and every one of them for the incredible effort they went to and the support they provided me. On my staff: we all know in this place we couldn't do anything without our staff. They have been terrific. My longest-serving staff member, Alistair Mitchell, tells me that over the past 17½ years I've had 86 staff who have moved through the various offices that I've occupied. But I particularly want to thank Kathy, Kylie, Karen, Bec, James, Kristian, Ben, Jackson, and ministerial staff Brendan Berne, Gisele, Doug, Drew and Britney. All of them have played a critical role in me achieving what it was that I was able to achieve. I want to thank Karly for her support and work, and I wish her the very best of luck. Karly will be running on Saturday for preselection for my seat, and I think she would make a terrific member in this place—but ultimately it's a decision, of course, for the Moncrieff preselectors. Alistair Mitchell, who's in the advisers box, has been with me for 13½ years. Alistair has always been someone of impeccable and prudent political advice. He's shaved off some of my excesses—not nearly enough, I think he would say. But he is someone who has been absolutely fundamental to all that I've achieved in this place, and I thank Alistair sincerely and from the bottom of my heart for the incredible working relationship that we've had over 13 years. I think it's fair to say that my strengths are your weaknesses and your weaknesses are my strengths, and I think that's a terrific political result. I thank early supporters Stuart Bruce, Darryl Gregor and Tony and Thea Cochrane. They were there from the outset and they've supported me every step of the journey. In this place, I've always focused on relationships. Relationships, I believe, are what make this building. They're what get political deals done. They're what get policy outcomes. In particular, the former member for North Sydney Joe Hockey, the Attorney-General Christian Porter, the member for Aston, the member for Wannon, Senator Fifield, Senators Brandis and Mason, the member for Leichhardt and, of course, previous Senator Santoro—all of these people—have been such wonderful friends and mates, and it's been a privilege to work alongside them. I want to thank the member for Curtin, Julie Bishop, with whom I had a terrific working relationship in the Foreign Affairs and Trade portfolio. I also want to thank the member for Flinders, Greg Hunt. I said the other day that the member for Flinders had delivered me my happiest day in this place, and I think he recognises the importance of it. In the gallery today I have a number of family members and colleagues. But, in particular, I've got my son Asher, who's sitting up there. Asher is a heart kid, as many of you know. His experience was a tough one for Astra and me—not so tough for him. But I am so profoundly proud of the support that Greg has given me when it comes to Heartkids, and I was so touched that the member for Kooyong was able to refer to the first initiative that we've made around Heartkids as part of a research mission. This is not about Asher; this is about the families that will follow in our footsteps. We—and Asher, in particular, with his experience—have been so incredibly blessed, but there are so many parents for whom heart kids become heart angels. For those parents, the $26 million that the government is investing into HeartKids—into congenital heart defects in children—is just so critical. That would not have happened without the support of the member for Flinders, and I am exceptionally grateful to him for that. I acknowledge my mum and dad. Mum and Dad aren't here today, but they have backed me and supported me every step of the journey in this place. They are wonderful parents. My father came to this country from Italy as a refugee. I think it's fair to say—as I said to Minister Canavan, one Italian to another—I'm not an Italian citizen. We ran through that comprehensively, and I'm pleased to say that there were no problems there. But, notwithstanding that, my parents instilled in me from a very early age the importance of a sound foundation in family and a work ethos, and I'm so incredibly grateful to them. I will conclude on this: my decision to not recontest the forthcoming federal election is based on many things, and I've thought about it for some time. But, in particular, it's also to show my sons, Asher and Tennyson, that, in life, you need to get out of your comfort zone. Getting out of your comfort zone and doing something different is just so important after you feel you've made a contribution. I've never wanted to be a time server in this place and I leave knowing that I've been able to achieve an extraordinary amount in this role. Relations are critical and, in that sense, I particularly want to acknowledge, in the member for Sterling and the member for Dickson, some of the best friendships that I've made here. Those two have been a fundamental part of the last 17½ years—or, in the member for Sterling's case, the last 15 years—together. They are political brothers of mine and it will be a very different place without us all being able to come together. I thank them for that. Finally, there is my wife, Astra. Astra has been rock-solid with me on every step of this journey. I don't say 'behind me'. I don't say she 'supported me'. We've stood beside each other. We were starry-eyed idealists, I think, when I first started in this role. Now we're more prudent and, I guess, a little weathered and we're both realistic. But, through it all, we know that the bond of love and friendship that we have together has meant that this has been an extraordinary journey. I can truly say that none of it would have been possible without the love and support of my wife, Astra. So to her, Asher and Tennyson: thank you so much for the privilege of serving in this place. And to all of my colleagues here: it has been an honour and a joy. I cannot thank the chamber enough.
Economy | Questions without Notice | House debates
It is a very nice tie, thank you. Last year, Australia recorded a $22.2 billion trade surplus—the largest trade surplus Australia has ever achieved in a single calendar year. It's a...
It is a very nice tie, thank you. Last year, Australia recorded a $22.2 billion trade surplus—the largest trade surplus Australia has ever achieved in a single calendar year. It's a consequence of the free trade agreements that the Liberal-National government put in place. A key contributor to this record surplus was an increase in resource exports. We saw thermal coal provided and produced a record $23 billion worth of export income for Australia. The great news is that these record exports have been terrific for jobs. In Queensland, in the resources sector in our state, it's created over 10,000 jobs over the past year. That represents one new job every 40 minutes created from resource sector exports. I know everyone on this side of the chamber supports those resource sector jobs. Unfortunately, not everyone on that side of the chamber does. In fact, the member for Leichhardt asked me about alternative approaches. We see some alternative approaches. We saw this morning the member for Corio had views about his alternative approach and that of the Australian Labor Party. He said the global market for thermal coal has collapsed and that that's wonderful and a good thing. The Australian Labor Party thinks it's a good thing that they can throw on the junk pile 55,000 jobs in the resources sector. Move over, member for Hunter, there's a brand new cheerleader in town for the demise of resource jobs, and it's the member for Corio. We see how divided the Australian Labor Party is with some of their union backers. We saw the CFMEU demanding Labor candidates pledge support for the coalmining industry. Following this weak Leader of the Opposition, we saw all 13 of Labor's candidates and MPs in Queensland's most marginal seats have all refused to comment. All of them joined the coalition of silence. We know this Leader of the Opposition is weak on border protection and we know he's too divided, too wedged and too weak on resources jobs as well. He won't stand up for jobs in the resources sector, but the coalition certainly will. The member for Herbert is part of the coalition of silence. She won't stand up for workers in her electorate. But I tell you what: LNP candidate Phillip Thompson will. The Labor candidate for Capricornia, despite being a member of the CFMEU, won't stand up for workers in that electorate. But I tell you what: the member for Capricornia will stand up for those workers. The Labor candidate for Dawson won't stand up for workers in that electorate, but the member for Dawson will stand up for all of those employees. The fact is that Labor's approach will see fewer jobs.
I thank the member for Leichhardt for his question.
Rearrangement | Business | House debates
I move: That orders of the day Nos 3 and 4, government business, be postponed until a later hour this day. Question agreed to.
Wine Australia Amendment (Trade with United Kingdom) Bill 2019; Third Reading | Bills | House debates
by leave—I move: That this bill be now read a third time. Question agreed to. Bill read a third time.
Wine Australia Amendment (Trade with United Kingdom) Bill 2019; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I'm certainly pleased to sum up the Wine Australia Amendment (Trade with United Kingdom) Bill 2019. This bill facilitates the continued trade in wine between Australia and United Kingdom in the...
I'm certainly pleased to sum up the Wine Australia Amendment (Trade with United Kingdom) Bill 2019. This bill facilitates the continued trade in wine between Australia and United Kingdom in the event of a Brexit transition period. The trade in wine between Australian and the UK is currently facilitated by the agreement between Australia and the European Community on trade and wine. This wine agreement will cease to apply to wine trade between Australia and the UK in the event of a no-deal Brexit, or at the end of any Brexit transition period. The bill amends the definition of an EC country in the Wine Australia Act 2013 to include the UK during a Brexit transition period. This will ensure the beneficial conditions for wine trade continue to apply between Australia and the UK during a Brexit transition period. It's certainly an important bill. It's important to Australia's wine exporters as well as the wine industry more broadly. It's important that the parliament supports continued market access and trade relationships that enable our wine industry to grow. I would note that, having had the privilege of serving as Australia's trade minister, we had a lot of very constructive conversations with the EU and the UK. In particular, my then counterpart Dr Fox and I were pleased that Australia was, in fact, the very first country with whom the UK formed a joint working group to look at the nature of our trade relationship post-Brexit and that we have had an officials-level working group, which has been in place now coming up to two or three years and is doing very important work. I'd also note, of course, that we have a large number of trade agreements that it's taken the Liberal and National government to put in place. I heard comments from opposition speakers talking about the relevance of these trade deals, but I would note that it's only been under this government that we've been able to put in place the market access that has seen a profound boost in Australia's wine exports. We, as a government, were able to put in place the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement, the Japan-Australia free trade agreement and the free trade agreement with South Korea. We were able to put in place the additional Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with Singapore in terms of its subsequent iteration. The work that we did on the comprehensive and progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership made sure I was able to lock that in on behalf of Australia. The work we did put in place the Peru-Australia Free Trade Agreement. We were able to include negotiations around the Indonesia-Australia Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement. We were able to commence negotiations for an FTA with the European Union as well as work with the Pacific Alliance countries of Colombia, Mexico, Chile and Peru. All of these are in place or underway because of the work of the Liberal-National government. I would highlight to opposition members who spoke in relation to this bill that Labor was frankly unable to start and conclude any deals when they were in office for six years. They did not commence and conclude a single trade deal in that six-year period, and yet in the six-year period that we've been in government I just outlined a very comprehensive list. What does all this mean? It means that we've been able to give Australia's wine producers incredible market access—so much so now that China is our single largest export market for Australian wine. I would remind opposition members that it was until one minute to midnight when Labor suddenly reversed their position. The Australian Labor Party were campaigning under the guise of, of course, the union movement against the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement. The Labor Party was opposed to the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement until one minute to midnight, and then they suddenly had a conversion on the road to Damascus, so to speak. So Australians can know full well that the incredible market access that we have had to markets like China, Japan, Korea, Peru, Singapore and, in time, the European Union are all a direct consequence of the Liberal-National government. I also note comments made by, for example, the member for Bendigo and others in relation to graphic indicators. I think it's a terrific shame that the Australian Labor Party is seeking to spook Australia's exporters, and in particular our wine exporters. There can be no doubt that there are elements of the European Union—certain stakeholders and constituencies—which have sought to establish a claim around geographic indicators. It's hardly new. Australia has worked in a comprehensive and constructive way with the European Union historically. For example, we agreed to have a geographic indicator around champagne and saw the creation of an entirely new category in Australia of sparkling wine. Just because we have done that historically doesn't mean that we'll do it in the future and doesn't mean we'll do it as part of this FTA. It demonstrates the bona fides of Australia in these negotiations. It's precisely the reason why it's taken a Liberal-National government to be able to approach with maturity and a highly evolved trade negotiation team that have been able to talk to these issues through and work in a constructive way. Ultimately, we know this is about boosting Australian exports, which in turn boosts Australian jobs. For all of those reasons, I'm certainly very pleased that the Labor Party is perhaps begrudgingly supporting this amendment. I'm very pleased that we will continue to see very strong exports of wine from Australia to the UK. I commend the bill to the House. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time.
Mr Acting Deputy Speaker, we're a long way off relevance now in terms of the bill that's before the House. This has nothing to do with wine exports to the UK.
Defence Industry | Questions without Notice | House debates
On Monday of this week, I had the pleasure of joining with the Prime Minister and the Minister for Defence as we commissioned the construction of 12 new submarines for our nation—an...
On Monday of this week, I had the pleasure of joining with the Prime Minister and the Minister for Defence as we commissioned the construction of 12 new submarines for our nation—an investment in new capability for our country; an investment in thousands of Australian jobs—using Australian steel and being built in this country. That's what you can do when you have the budget under control. You can invest in making sure our nation's borders are strong and our nation is secure. I'll go to the member for Robertson's question. I know she's passionate about border protection and the security of our nation, like all of us on this side. All of us are invested in making the hard decisions to restore the budget and make sure we can keep our nation secure. It stands in very stark contrast to the Australian Labor Party. Not only was 1989 the last year that the Australian Labor Party ran a budget surplus but, incidentally, 1989 was the last time the Australian Labor Party commissioned a new build of a vessel when it came to our defence industry. In fact, last time Labor were in power, for the six years that they were in control of this nation's security, they did not commission a single vessel. They ran budget deficits and were not able to invest in Aussie jobs or make sure that our nation was secure. It was because their priorities were all at sea. Their priorities were all at sea because we saw a complete blowout in the protection of our borders. We saw more than 50,000 illegal arrivals to our country. We saw, sadly, more than 1,200 fatalities. We saw more than 10,200 people in detention, of which 2,000 were children. They spent billions upon billions of dollars trying to clean up the mess that they caused when they tinkered with our nation's laws. At the very time that the Liberal and National government is investing an extra $200 billion—making our country secure, boosting our Defence Force, providing maximum protection for our men and women in uniform and investing in Australia's defence industry—the Labor Party has once again put all of that in jeopardy by adopting a posture on border protection that weakens our nation's border and, importantly, threatens the budget position of our nation, which completely erodes any ability to ensure, if they were elected, they could continue to invest in our Defence Force. The simple facts are that it takes a Liberal and National government to protect our borders. It takes a Liberal and National government to restore our budget. It takes a Liberal and National government to invest $200 billion in defence and create thousands of jobs. (Time expired)
I thank the member for Bonner for his question. I can see members of the Labor Party getting a bit excited, no doubt looking for some inspiration on defence policy. You can understand why....
I thank the member for Bonner for his question. I can see members of the Labor Party getting a bit excited, no doubt looking for some inspiration on defence policy. You can understand why. Labor's track record on defence industry policy, from the last time Labor was in power, is pretty average. Those on this side know that we've commenced and actually commissioned 55 vessels. When Labor were in government for six years, how many do you think they commissioned? Fifty-five? Fifty? Forty? Thirty? Labor's track record was zero vessels commissioned. I want to speak about the member for Bonner and, in particular, the way in which the coalition, the Liberal-National government, are backing in Australia's small to medium businesses around defence industry. The fact is that the member for Bonner has in his electorate a business called Ferra Engineering. It's just one example of how Australian defence industry is benefiting from this government's investment in the Defence Export Strategy and defence industry more generally. In fact, Ferra Engineering in his electorate has now won about one-tenth of all of the Australian contracts in the global F-35 program. It's through the support of the Liberal-National government that businesses like Ferra Engineering have been able to grow, invest with certainty and create more Australian jobs. We are making it easier, and we're determined and resolute to make sure that Australian companies can access global supply chains so they can grow their businesses and grow employment. That's why we created the Defence Export Facility to give Australian businesses access to export finance to ensure they're more competitive. It's also the reason why we put in place the Defence Export Strategy, which is delivering results. As the Minister for Defence said, at $3.2 billion, Australian defence exports in just the last quarter were higher than the previous two years combined. That doesn't happen by accident. That's a result of deliberate policy design. It's about government backing in, through taxpayer funds, the support that industry needs. It's very different to Labor's approach. The shadow minister for defence spoke recently at an event where he was asked what Labor's policy is when it comes to defence industry. He said: I'm not really sure … It's a profound and deep decision the nation needs to make and we haven't made it. In other words, with six months to go, the Australian Labor Party don't even have a policy on defence industry. For the 25,000 Australians that are employed in the defence industry space, for those who are relying on the fact that the Liberal-National government commissioned 55 vessels, and for those who remember Labor's track record of reducing spending down to a measly 1.56 per cent of GDP, they know that Labor will be— (Time expired)
Taxation | Constituency Statements | House debates
Can I, too, acknowledge the former Speakers that are with us: it's great to see you both again. I'd like to raise Labor's retirees tax 2.0. This is part of Labor's tax grab to do what they can to...
Can I, too, acknowledge the former Speakers that are with us: it's great to see you both again. I'd like to raise Labor's retirees tax 2.0. This is part of Labor's tax grab to do what they can to try and prop up their budget with their profligate spending, an approach that the Australian Labor Party continues to pursue notwithstanding the fact that, as outlined in today's Australian, it sees Labor's retiree tax policy 2.0 stealing money from low-income earners in this country. Labor's proposed changes around franking credits will see more than 870,000 Australians worse off. It's interesting that the shadow Treasurer is here: he needs to hear what people are directly saying and what the impact of Labor's theft from people's retirement savings will be. Take my electorate, for example: I've got around 5,973 people that will be affected as a result of Labor's policies, and around 5,500 people in each of the neighbouring electorates of Fadden and McPherson—in total, around 17,000 Gold Coasters will be adversely affected by Labor's tax grab to pay for their reckless spending. I have had around 80 people contact my office directly, expressing their concern at Labor's plans to steal money from them. Take David, who's 69, and Margaret, who's 61, of Southport. David has worked for 45 years, paid his taxes and accumulated enough for a modest pension. Without franking credits he now stands to lose around one-third of his income. That is a direct impact of Labor's policy. Make no mistake: Labor's policy will see one third of his income, which he worked hard to provide, going as extra tax revenue to pay for Labor's spending. Or take Christine, who's 53, and Garry, who's 66, from Benowa. Christine and Garry own a small family business in the construction industry contracting local tradies, and they also employ their daughter. A big part of their retirement strategy, which they've been planning now for more than 15 years, was to use the retained profits in their business together with the associated franking credits as their income stream. They didn't take home hefty pay cheques; instead, they decided to invest the money back into their business so that they could gain more work. By doing this, their business grew. It meant there was more work in the pipeline, and they were able to hire more local tradesmen and give them more consistent work, even when the construction industry wasn't as vibrant as it currently is. They epitomise the everyday Gold Coast family who are having a go and starting a family business, working hard and putting in tireless hours so that they could get ahead and provide for themselves. Labor's proposed changes to the franking credits will significantly impact their retirement. Garry's just turned 66. They're both still working and were hoping to retire within the next year. But now, this will all be up in the air. The fact is that Labor's tax grab on franking credits will mean that older Australians will have to pay more to pay for Labor's reckless spending, and it entirely up-ends their plans around retirement.
Morrison Government | Questions without Notice | House debates
The simple fact is that, as I said, the Liberal and National parties will keep investing in defence capability and will keep investing in Australia's defence industry. And, most importantly, we...
The simple fact is that, as I said, the Liberal and National parties will keep investing in defence capability and will keep investing in Australia's defence industry. And, most importantly, we will make sure the men and women of Australia's Defence Force come home safely, because we're prepared to invest in safeguarding them, creating jobs in Australia and making sure our defence industry is strong. But, because it's clearly beyond the shadow minister opposite, let me make it clear. Maybe you've got your smart phone in front of you. You might want to punch in www.minister.defence.gov.au, because you'll see there's a full list of responsibilities there. So, if it's far beyond you to know what it is, I suggest you have a look. But, more importantly than that, what I'd say to the Australian Labor Party is that you need to take seriously the Australian defence industry and you need to invest in capability, because your track record is shameful. For six years, the Australian Labor Party did not commission a single new vessel for Australia. For six years you failed to invest in Australian jobs. For six years you failed to take seriously what we're doing in defence industry. We've corrected the record. We've made sure that we've got the defence industry back on track. We're creating jobs. We're investing $200 billion. And we are making sure that, under our watch, we won't go back to the lowly and miserly 1.38 per cent of GDP that existed under the Australian Labor Party. So you stand condemned for six years of inaction, and we stand proud beside the men and women of the Australian Defence Force. Honourable members interjecting—
when it comes to investing in the build-up of Australia's defence capability. The Australian Labor Party lacks any goodwill at all, frankly, when it comes to making sure that the billions of...
when it comes to investing in the build-up of Australia's defence capability. The Australian Labor Party lacks any goodwill at all, frankly, when it comes to making sure that the billions of dollars that the coalition is expending in the Defence portfolio goes towards creating jobs; investing in the science, technology, engineering and mathematics of young Australians coming through; investing in advanced manufacturing; and, most importantly, making sure we have a pipeline of investment in the next generation of capability for the men and women who serve in the Australian Defence Force. That's the contrast between the coalition, the Liberal and National parties, with our pipeline of investment, and the Australian Labor Party. These guys are much more interested in being involved in the Canberra bubble and they're much more interested in playing games around politics than they are in knowing the facts about what our Defence Force is doing.
The extraordinary thing about the Australian Labor Party on this issue is that they don't even have a Minister for Defence Industry. The Australian Labor Party has no track record at all—...
The extraordinary thing about the Australian Labor Party on this issue is that they don't even have a Minister for Defence Industry. The Australian Labor Party has no track record at all— Mr Champion interjecting—
Moncrieff Electorate: Law Enforcement | Constituency Statements | House debates
I rise to speak about a report in the Gold Coast Bulletin today which says that the police budget has been slashed for the Gold Coast. Regrettably and unfortunately, this is entirely consistent...
I rise to speak about a report in the Gold Coast Bulletin today which says that the police budget has been slashed for the Gold Coast. Regrettably and unfortunately, this is entirely consistent with the Queensland state Labor government's approach to not providing the necessary resources for the Queensland police to do their job effectively on the Gold Coast. Sadly, we've seen previously the consequences of Labor's complete mismanagement when it comes to the Queensland economy and the Queensland police. We can only remember, sadly, the unfortunate reputation that the Gold Coast developed a number of years back for being the bikie capital of Australia and the home of organised crime because we had a state Labor government that was soft on crime, was soft on law and order, and didn't provide the necessary resources for the Queensland police to be able to do their job effectively. It took the election of a Liberal-National state government to correct that problem. I've got to highlight today that, under this state Labor government doing the very average job that they're doing, we have now seen frontline police struggling. There are now in fact in the City of the Gold Coast—a city of more than 600,000 people—31 fewer frontline police officers under Labor than there were back in 2015 when the Liberal-National Party was in power. Labor are soft on crime. They're soft on law and order. They're denying the Gold Coast the police resources the city needs. And, unfortunately, we are seeing a consequent increase in a whole range of different crimes on the Gold Coast. I say to the state Labor government: pull your socks up. I say to the state Labor government: it's time you actually provided the Queensland police with the resources they need. The Gold Coast Bulletinand I congratulate them for the work they've done—have the editorial today: 'Ryan treats us like mugs'. It talks about what an average police minister we have in this very average state Labor government. I will continue to be a strong advocate for the Gold Coast, and I say to the state Labor government that they need to do a hell of a lot better than they've been doing so far. This is coming from someone with a strong track record of investing in law and order on the Gold Coast. We saw the former federal Labor government rip police resources out of the Gold Coast when they shut down the AFP office. I brought it back. I fought for it for the city. The fact is that we delivered the first strike force on the Gold Coast. We brought back the AFP and got rid of the bikies, and I say to the state Labor government that they need to do a hell of a lot better to improve police resources on the Gold Coast. (Time expired)
Trade | Questions without Notice | House debates
Sorry, Mr Speaker. Should the Leader of the Opposition ever become the leader of this country, we know the collapse of that house of cards will see a collapse in trade policy in this country. We...
Sorry, Mr Speaker. Should the Leader of the Opposition ever become the leader of this country, we know the collapse of that house of cards will see a collapse in trade policy in this country. We don't know what Labor believes on trade. We know, and Australians know, that we believe in creating economic opportunity. We know, and Australians know, that we believe in creating jobs for Australians through trade. In fact, more than a million have been created in this country on our watch. But Labor's policy still remains so unclear. That confusion manifests in lots of different ways. We see it because the Left have become so rambunctious—because they're unhappy with where the leader is going. And we also see it in others who know the fundamental importance of trade and who are displeased that the Australian Labor Party has no consistency and no clear compass for where they're going on trade. The simple fact is that Labor's policy on trade is clear: in six years they were unable to start and conclude a single trade deal. So compare and contrast that with a government that knows what it believes, that puts in place export opportunities, that drives economic growth and that creates jobs. Compare it to an Australian Labor Party, that is completely lost when it comes to trade in this country.
Today is a good day for trade. It's a good day for trade because the coalition, the Liberal and National parties, have delivered on our vision of making sure that we are driving economic growth...
Today is a good day for trade. It's a good day for trade because the coalition, the Liberal and National parties, have delivered on our vision of making sure that we are driving economic growth in this country and driving jobs in this country. We believe, as Liberals and Nationals together, in the benefits to all Australians of free trade. We believe in creating more economic opportunity for small businesses and we believe in backing-in those small businesses. We, as Liberals and Nationals, fundamentally understand that trade is good news for Australian workers and good news for Australian exporters. That is the reason why, as a government, we have been so deeply committed to opening up trade agreements. In fact, since 2013, the Liberal and National parties have opened and concluded eight free trade agreements, including the North Asian FTAs with China, Japan and Korea; the comprehensive update that took place with Singapore; PACER Plus; the Peru-Australia Free Trade Agreement; the Indonesia-Australia Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement, which we delivered; and, of course, the TPP-11. But I've got to throw a flower towards Labor—one flower—and that is for the fact that Labor did support the enabling legislation in the Senate. But I have to say that when it comes to trade we really don't know what Labor believes at all. Fundamentally, the Australian Labor Party on trade is a complete house of cards. Should Bill Shorten ever become the Prime Minister—
Customs Amendment (Collecting Tobacco Duties at the Border) Bill 2018; Third Reading | Bills | House debates
Customs Amendment (Collecting Tobacco Duties at the Border) Bill 2018; Second Reading | Bills | House debates
I would like to thank members for their contributions to the debate on the Customs Amendment (Collecting Tobacco Duties at the Border) Bill 2018. From 1 July 2019, the measures in this bill will...
I would like to thank members for their contributions to the debate on the Customs Amendment (Collecting Tobacco Duties at the Border) Bill 2018. From 1 July 2019, the measures in this bill will establish a framework that requires importers to pay all import duties on tobacco when it enters the country, thereby denying criminal groups the opportunity to obtain tobacco on which duty has not been paid. The bill is complemented by the Treasury Laws Amendment (Black Economy Taskforce Measures No. 2) Bill 2018 and the Excise Tariff Amendment (Collecting Tobacco Duties at Manufacture) Bill 2018. They provide a framework to make excise duty on tobacco due at the time of domestic manufacture. Full details of the measure are contained in the explanatory memorandum. I commend the bill to the House. Question agreed to. Bill read a second time.
an investment that we're able to make in Australia's defence posture as a direct consequence of the strong economic stewardship of the Liberal and National government. It's only because we've...
an investment that we're able to make in Australia's defence posture as a direct consequence of the strong economic stewardship of the Liberal and National government. It's only because we've been able to get the budget back under control that we've been able to invest in building up Australia's defence industry. We are deeply committed to businesses like those found in the member for Brisbane's electorate—businesses like Explosive Protective Equipment, a family-owned business in his electorate that employs 22 hardworking Aussies. All across Australia we've got so many examples of great Australian SMEs. There are some 3,000 or so that employ around 13,000 hardworking Australians in this sector. And, because we've got the budget under control, we can invest this $200 billion. The second prong of our strategy is to make sure that we provide direct support to boosting the prospects of Australia's SME sector. We are doing that through policy settings that ensure that we have overcome the challenges that were left behind by the Australian Labor Party. When the member for Brisbane asks about risks, there are substantial risks not only to Australia's economic position from the Australian Labor Party if they are elected at the next election but also to Australia's defence and Australia's defence industry. What we saw when Labor was last in power was six years of inaction. We saw the Australian Labor Party preside over a situation where they did not put in a single order for a new boat while they were in government, and so we saw the peaks and the troughs of a lack of investment in Australia's defence industry. It has taken now the Liberal-National government to build capacity by $200 billion and to put in place the continuous shipbuilding plan, which will create 15,000 jobs and see an investment of $89 billion. Only a strong Australian economy can make that kind of investment, and only the Liberal and National government can, through prudent economic management, make sure that we create opportunities for small business, create employment for Australians and make sure there is a strong, continuous pipeline of new opportunities.
I thank the member for Brisbane for his question because everyone on this side of the chamber is absolutely passionate about what it is that the Liberal and National government is doing for...
I thank the member for Brisbane for his question because everyone on this side of the chamber is absolutely passionate about what it is that the Liberal and National government is doing for Australia's SME sector and, in particular, the way in which we're delivering for Australian small and medium-sized businesses through our $200 billion build-up of sovereign capability when it comes to Australia's defence industry. The fact is that the Liberal-National government is repairing the damage that was done to Australia's defence posture as a consequence of six years of inaction by the former Labor government. The way we are doing it has two prongs. The first is to ensure that we build our domestic capability. We are doing that with a substantial investment— Dr Mike Kelly interjecting—