House debates

Wednesday, 11 December 2013

Matters of Public Importance

Infrastructure

4:37 pm

Photo of Julie CollinsJulie Collins (Franklin, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Regional Development and Local Government) Share this | Hansard source

Our government did invest in infrastructure. We inherited a dearth of infrastructure, an infrastructure deficit right across this country. The Howard government, with all the money flowing in, hardly spent anything on infrastructure. What it did spend it spent in marginal seats. It did not spend it for the productivity capacity of the country.

In my state of Tasmania, under the Howard government, 90 per cent of road funding went into two electorates held by Liberal Party members. None of it, over $400 million, went into the south of the state. When we came into government we put $810 million, in the first five years, into my state of Tasmania. We put it into the state's productivity capacity. We put it into rail, we put it into road and we put it into ports. We put it into those areas that would improve Tasmania's productivity capacity. In my own electorate we had the Kingston bypass. It was talked about for 38 years, announced by our government and delivered by our government. It was a real privilege to go to that opening.

We all know today's MPI is about the importance of infrastructure decisions being made with independence and transparency—independence from Infrastructure Australia. At the last federal election we saw an announcement by the opposition, the now government, for an upgrade of Hobart Airport, in my seat of Franklin. It was for $38 million. The new government wants to give this to Macquarie Bank, the airport owner. Part of that project was disallowed by Infrastructure Australia. It was put up by the state government and was told it would not go ahead. That project has now changed. I am supportive of developing Hobart Airport but I do question the political interference in this decision to fund the airport.

We should have no political interference in Infrastructure Australia. We need Infrastructure Australia to go about its important work, to look at the productivity capacity of our country, to look at the blockages, to put up the projects along with the states and to assess those projects on how they will impact right across the country—how that taxpayer dollar is being spent. It is very important. As the member for Grayndler, then Minister Albanese, said, we went from 20th in OECD countries to No. 2 under the former Labor government. That was because of our investments in infrastructure. We knew how important they were to the future of this country. We announced many investments into public transport, particularly into passenger rail, because we knew how important they were. We heard from the member for Kingston earlier that some of those passenger rails have not been funded by the new government. They have been left out and do not know whether they will be funded. Interestingly, there has been no decision made on the Moreton Bay railway, in the Petrie electorate. I wonder why that might be? Is it because the state members have a by-election up there? Is that the political interference that is going on? Who would know?

Very important projects right across the country are being constructed because of investments made by the previous Labor government. They are being invested in Tasmania, South Australia, Western Australia, Queensland, New South Wales and Victoria—right across the country. They should be invested where needed and where those roads, ports and railways need to be upgraded, for the best interests of the country. That is what Infrastructure Australia should be doing, and it should be doing it independently. It should be making recommendations to the government—which, rightly, make decisions on where that funding should go—but the recommendations made by Infrastructure Australia should be without interference. This is very important; otherwise, we could see, like we have in my electorate in Tasmania, funding going to projects that Infrastructure Australia has said should not be funded. It is very important infrastructure that I support, but it should be funded by the owners of the airport in my electorate.

What Labor really wants to see from Infrastructure Australia, and what it wants to see right across the country, are safer and more efficient roads for everybody. That is what it has been aiming for: a revitalised rail sector. In my home state of Tasmania we invested $200 million and we want to invest more. We do not know if that will happen. (Time expired)

Comments

No comments