Michael Sukkar (Deakin, Liberal Party, Assistant Minister to the Treasurer) Share this | Hansard source

It is great to have the member for Wakefield so excited to receive an answer. I will start with your question and the related questions from the member for Boothby in relation to the ASC. Luckily, the member for Wakefield is here to listen to the answer.

As you know, the government announced the structural separation of ASC into its three core functions: a shipbuilders business, a submarine sustainment business and the Collins class submarines. I can assure you that the government is determined to ensure these assets remain in Commonwealth hands because we do want to ensure that we maintain and sustain this industry on an ongoing basis. The member for Wakefield spoke about some of the issues, potentially, around skills. He was obviously not assisted by the fact that the government of which he was a member did not place one order for six years. Ultimately, that led them to the valley of death, which meant that there was a vacation of those skills. Unfortunately, people cannot hang around forever for a Labor government to make a decision, and that is probably the biggest single factor in this sense.

Of course, the member for Boothby rightly pointed out that we will be building nine of the future frigates in her home state, which is the member for Wakefield's home state. There was a total of 54 naval vessels that the coalition has committed to building in Australia compared, as I said, to the zero vessels that the government of which the member for Wakefield was a member built. During that time, the member for Wakefield was supposedly a champion of his community. I would say that your effectiveness in that caucus must be questioned by your constituents given that not one order was placed for six years.

Mr Champion interjecting—

You obviously do not have much pull in that caucus, Member for Wakefield.

I think this is good news. I think there are always fair questions to ask, including: how do we get the skilled workforce necessary? The one way you do not do it is not make an order for six years. On this side of the House, we absolutely have that commitment. I think the Australian people, especially South Australians and constituents in the member for Wakefield's electorate, can be confident that we will appropriately ramp up and assist ASC, which is an independent body, to ramp up their workforce to be able to meet those.

I also want to get onto another question that was asked. The member for Banks spoke about our housing affordability package and property divestment. In the 2014-15 budget, the government announced that we would rationalise Commonwealth non-Defence property through a divestment program, which, in effect, utilises the significant assets that have been sitting on the Commonwealth balance sheet for some time for more productive purposes. I report to the House that, since July 2014, 95 non-Defence properties have been sold or are under contract or offer, and, to date, around $37 million has been returned to the budget under the divestment program, and a further 56 non-Defence properties have been listed for divestment. This dovetails into one aspect of the housing affordability package in the budget, which is a commitment from this government to unlock Commonwealth land.

Compared to the states and local governments, we actually do not hold a truckload of land, but I think we have quite rightly and quiet fairly criticised state and local governments for not doing enough to ease housing affordability pressures, particularly in our big cities. One of the things we should do is lead by example. That means, where we have surplus land, in the case of Maribyrnong—

Mr Hill interjecting—

in my home town, 127 hectares less than 10 kilometres from the city—excuse me, Madam Deputy Speaker, can you ask the member to withdraw, please?

See this speech in context