Jamie Briggs (Mayo, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise in part to support the member for Dobell, the chair of the Standing Committee on Economics, who did a good job in managing this inquiry, as did Stephen Boyd and his assistants in the committee secretariat—Sharon Bryant, Chris Kane and Renee Burton—who helped enormously with what some might describe as a rather dry subject but a very important one nonetheless. It was a good inquiry and we had high-quality submissions. We took evidence from interesting and intelligent sources and quite a good report has been prepared by the committee. The report is entitled Inquiry into raising the productivity growth rate in the Australian economy.

Those on the coalition side of this committee largely agreed with the report’s recommendations. There were a couple of areas of dispute, but we were able to manage those reasonably amicably towards the end. We were concerned that the government was trying to create more talkfests. We wanted to see some more push for action out of the report, which contains some high-quality recommendations. We were concerned particularly with recommendation 3—that the government, as it has been known to do in its term, not create another talkfest and review in lieu of taking real action. But, in the end, for the purposes of getting the report done and tabled, we succumbed to the pressure of the chair.

When the report was released some weeks ago, we made a point of highlighting recommendation 6, which talks about an evidence based approach to policy, which we absolutely agree with. We are surprised that the government have not taken their own advice. There was no productivity report associated with the Building the Education Revolution—the memorial school halls program, as some people call it—the laptops in schools program, which has unfortunately had a billion dollar blow-out, or indeed the cash splash. There has been no productivity benefit analysis of the National Broadband Network and they are planning to spend $43 billion there. We are disappointed that recommendation 6 has not been taken up by the government. Hopefully it will be taken up in the future. I am sure a future Abbott-led coalition government will be keen to ensure that we have an evidence based policy regime rather than the cash splash, big spending approach of this government.

The shadow Treasurer made a very good and detailed speech about the economic challenges facing Australia and identified productivity as the No. 1 issue from the coalition’s perceptive. He highlighted several areas where we need to particularly focus, and I think they are worthwhile noting in conjunction with this report. He made the point that we should ensure that community infrastructure, both privately and publicly owned, is adequate and efficient—roads, rail, ports, utilities, telecommunications, the legal system and so on. Government investment in infrastructure should be subject to cost benefit analysis—the same point as the report makes.

The second way governments can improve productivity is to lower the cost of capital and maximise the availability of capital for private business. Governments should not be competing with the private sector for scarce capital, especially once businesses have returned to the market. This is the issue of crowding out—government borrowing too much money. The third step is to minimise drag from the government—government regulations and taxation. We know about government regulations in this area. Competitive markets is the fourth area. The fifth area is concerned with skilling the workforce. The sixth area concerns encouraging innovation, which of course is very important and is dealt with in the report.

I think the report adds very much to the economic debate in this country. It contains a great deal of very important and relevant information from a range of sources that appeared before the committee to give evidence. Submissions to the committee contain good suggestions and are well worthwhile. I commend the report to the House and recommend members read it from cover to cover. I am sure they will be a lot wiser for it.

See this speech in context