Tony Smith (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I have received a letter from the honourable member for Ballarat proposing that a definite matter of public importance be submitted to the House for discussion, namely:

The Government's decade of neglect of regional Australians and increasing misuse of taxpayers' money.

I call upon all those honourable members who approve of the proposed discussion to rise in their places.

More than the number of members required by the standing orders having risen in their places—

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Day after day in this place, and week after week, we've been treated to the spectacle of the National Party trying to have you believe that they, sitting on the government benches, are the only one true voice of our regions, that only the National Party represents the regions. Time and time again, we hear them use that as an excuse for holding the country hostage across a vast range of progressive policy areas, whether it's from climate change, whether it's investing in renewable energy, whether it's investing in regions across the country. That is what we hear from them.

The truth of the matter is that no one political party has a monopoly on representing our regions. Our regions in this place are represented by members of the Liberal Party. They are represented by Independents, the Katter party and members of the Australian Labor Party. All of us, together, care deeply about what happens in regional Australia. Our regions are complex. They are diverse. They are as complex and diverse as the economies that support them.

The National Party would have you believe that the regions of this nation look and sound and think exactly like they do, and nothing could be further from the truth. The stranglehold that the National Party has over regional policy in this government is holding our regions back—and I know there are members on the other side, in the Liberal Party, who represent our regions who know it too. There is no greater demonstration of that than what we saw happen with the climate debate this week.

We're told from media reports—we don't know, because somehow there's a secret deal about this so-called net zero promise that some of the National Party have signed up to and some haven't—that there's some regional Future Fund. If the history, of the way in which the National Party treats regional funding, is anything to go by I can guarantee that it won't be the regions across this grand spectrum of Australia that benefit. It won't be the regions in the Australian Labor Party held electorates or the Independent held electorates or even the Liberal Party held electorates; it will be a small group of electorates that, frankly, do deserve funding but are not on their own.

We saw recently, with the recent round of the Building Better Regions Fund, just how the National Party treats taxpayer funding. Ninety per cent of that fund went to seats held by the Liberal National Party or to seats we know, such as Hunter, such as Flynn, they are intending to target or desperately want to hang on to at the next election. The result of that has been that there are regions and then there are National Party supported regions. And that is not helping anybody except the National Party when it comes to trying to stay in office. We saw that again when we saw the minister for resources—the only person whose job seemed to benefit out of the so-called climate change deal the National Party has done.

This is not a way to run our country and it's not a way to support our regions. The truth of the matter is: there is no regional policy in this country. There hasn't been since Labor was last in office. There are a series of buckets of funding that the National Party systematically rorts to its own benefit. That is the equivalent of the National Party's regional development fund. Goodness help us when we see what they're likely to do with the next fund.

When we talk about the Building Better Regions Fund in particular, a fund the Australian National Audit Office is currently investigating, we know that since 2018 over a billion dollars of this fund has been channelled through—90 per cent of that total fund has gone to coalition held and targeted seats. If you look at the Deputy Leader of the Nationals' seat of Maranoa, during that period of time that seat has received $52 million worth of funding out of this grants scheme. The former Deputy Prime Minister's seat of Riverina has received $27 million during that period out of the Building Better Regions Fund, $22.4 million went to the current Deputy Prime Minister's seat of New England and $19.6 million went to the former Attorney-General's seat of Pearce. At the same time, $2 million went to the seat of Bendigo, $1.1 million went to the seat of Cunningham, $1.5 million went to the seat of Newcastle and a grand total of $241,000 went to the seat of McEwen. How is that at all justifiable as a regional development policy? It simply is not. It is not a fair policy. It is not a transparent policy. It is a rorted policy.

The National Party has its grubby fingers all over this program. We know that because 112 of the 330 projects approved under round 3 of the Building Better Regions Fund were chosen by a secret ministerial panel, against the advice of the department. Unsurprisingly, this is the exact same round announced in the run-up to the 2019 federal election campaign that saw coalition seats or coalition target seats receive 94 per cent of all projects and 94 per cent of all funding.

In round 5, another pre-election round, we know even more thanks to the member for Mallee, who in a brief moment of honesty told us that coalition MPs were given access to secret project spreadsheets that were colour-coded pink and green, and that they had a further opportunity that nobody else seemed to—including, I think, members of the Liberal Party—to actually go and lobby for those projects that were important to their regions, even if they did not quite fit the program's criteria. You won't be surprised to hear that the member for Mallee's seat has received over $38 million worth of funding under this Building Better Regions Fund.

What the government won't tell us, though, is which projects were cut and denied funding because they didn't suit the National Party's and the Morrison government's agendas. How many projects that fully met the criteria have missed out to those in Nationals seats that didn't quite fit the criteria? They won't tell you because this isn't about the regions; it's about them staying in power. It's about using taxpayer funding for election-winning purposes. That's what it is about. As I said before, when it comes to climate change, you can see the failings of the National Party writ large on the national stage.

I am a proud representative of regional Australia. I care about climate change and so does my community. Farmers in my region know that climate change is real; they see it every single day. Communities in south-west New South Wales and East Gippsland know that climate change is real; while the Prime Minister was in Hawaii, they lived it. Communities in the far north who rely on the Great Barrier Reef know that climate change is real; they count the cost of bleaching events. Communities all along the Murray-Darling know climate change is real; they see it in the droughts and in reduced river flows. Communities across Australia see it in floods, droughts, fires and storms. But not only do they see the cost; they know the benefits that climate action can bring.

We know that the Business Council's own modelling has found that, on average, Australians will be around $5,000 better off per person under a net-zero scenario, with regional Australians around three times better off compared to capital city residents. But we don't hear that from those in the National Party who represent that small number of seats that they claim is the mirror of regional Australia across the country. We don't hear from them about what's happening to workers in their regions across this country. We don't hear them worrying about the casualisation of people working in the mining sector—we don't hear them talk about that. We don't hear about the disparity in wages. They don't care about the workers in the regions—they don't care about them at all! They only care about their own self-interest. And nothing about that is writ larger than the Minister for Resources and Water being elevated to cabinet, someone who does not support net zero and who doesn't support the regions but certainly supported his own job in that process.

We know that the National Farmers Federation and Meat & Livestock Australia, all of those, and thousands of regional Australians feel betrayed by this National Party, which has completely and simply lost the plot when it comes to climate change. This is a party of dinosaurs; they no longer represent the regions. If we want to see what the regions look like, then look on our side. Look at the fabulous women that we have on our side representing the diversity of the regions: the members for Bendigo, Corangamite, Eden-Monaro, Gilmore, Richmond, Paterson, Macquarie, Newcastle, Dobell, Franklin and Cunningham. These are strong regional women who are standing up for their communities every single day. If we want to see the difference between our side and their side when it comes to the regions, just watch this debate and see the dinosaurs that they've put up on their side— (Time expired)

David Gillespie (Lyne, National Party, Minister Assisting the Minister for Trade and Investment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to totally refute the aspersions made by the member for Ballarat. The Building Better Regions Fund has been the lifeblood for many local government councils in regional Australia and reflects the geography of Australia and their representations.

It's interesting; the coalition seats cover five million square kilometres. Labor has 1.5 million square kilometres of Australian country that it represents, and one seat, Lingiari, which covers 1.35 million square kilometres of it. In this huge, wide, brown land called Australia, there are Labor Party members representing 130 square kilometres around Australia. So it's no wonder more of the seats went to regional areas!

The member for Shortland didn't worry about getting $10 million for the Hunter Sports Centre, or the member for Cunningham—I think it's now called a different name—when it got $1 million for the Wollongong Regional Tennis Hub. The members for Solomon and Lingiari both claimed credit for getting the SWELL Centre, which is a $5 million swimming, wellness and leisure centre up there in Palmerston. Nor did the member for Lyons complain about a $625,000 playground upgrade or the Derwent Valley Health and Wellbeing Hub for $3.7 million. Gee—I mean, hypocrites! The seat of Bendigo covers 5,280 square kilometres. The members for Mallee and Maranoa, between them—Mallee has 83,00 square kilometres, so obviously they have many more local government areas; Maranoa has 70 local government areas and 730,000 square kilometres.

In the last decade, the amount of investment going into regional Australia has been second to none. In infrastructure, you've only got to look at these megaprojects that the coalition has championed, like finally completing the Pacific Highway upgrade, a $5.5 billion project. Under the Building Better Regions Fund, there are the amounts going into really good infrastructure and community and social projects—there's just short of a thousand of them—in regional Australia. The last round will be supporting 9,900 jobs during construction of these projects. They are critical to regional areas, which have local governments that are really stretched. They have huge populations, huge areas to cover—not like inner-city electorates; some of them you could ride around in two hours on a pushbike. The member for Parkes's electorate is bigger than Germany. The member for Maranoa's is even bigger. Of the members in South Australia, O'Connor is absolutely massive. That is why there is a sway towards regional Australia with these funds.

We have really helped connectivity in physical infrastructure. Just think of all the funds into regional infrastructure. Roads to Recovery has been expanded. There's the Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program. There's the Mobile Phone Black Spot Program. Do you know how many mobile phone black spots the ALP did when they were in government? How many mobile phone towers did they supply? The answer is zero. I can tell you, Mr Deputy Speaker, there are 1,270 new or upgraded mobile phone towers around the country because of that program. I would like to thank the former member for Cowper, the Hon. Luke Hartsuyker; that was his policy brainchild, and it has transformed mobile phone coverage in regional Australia.

We have supported small businesses, which are the lifeblood of employment in regional Australia. The small business tax rate is now down to 25 per cent. For unincorporated businesses, their tax offset has gone from 13 per cent to 16 per cent. In my own electorate, I've got over 10,500 small businesses that benefited from this lowering of the small business tax rate, before COVID struck.

In regional Australia, home building has been given a massive boost because of the HomeBuilder program, and we have really powered up apprenticeship training with our wage subsidies for new apprentices. There were 100,000 that benefited from this program in the first couple of rounds, and, during COVID, that number has grown to potentially another 170,000 subsidised apprenticeships.

We have established regional university centres around Australia, including the Taree Universities Campus. It started just over a year ago and it has already got 85 people utilising that centre to remotely gather and study together and do a university degree that they didn't have before. But they're in other places like Griffith and Goulburn, also in Maranoa, and in other areas around the country—over in WA and in South Australia. It's been transformational, giving people a chance to do a university degree with support, rather than doing it on their kitchen table, with difficulty, after hours. Many of the people doing it are first in family to get a university degree started, let alone finished. In terms of completion rates, these programs really give people a major benefit—because it is a hard slog if you're doing distance education and working.

There are other things that we've done—in agriculture, for instance. In the 10 years that the member for Ballarat was complaining about, in agriculture we have supported and developed the Future Drought Fund. There's the farm household allowance. People maybe have got a big farm worth a lot of money. They're asset rich but cash poor, because owning the land doesn't give you an income. In the worst drought that we've lived through in a hundred years, that farm household allowance has been a lifesaver.

We've developed the mandatory code of conduct for the dairy industry and, likewise, the sugar code of conduct. We've got the Made in Australia label showing the country of origin, where foodstuff comes from, so the food that we produce gets a premium. We've developed sustainability for agriculture. We've developed a soil strategy for keeping our soils rich so that farmers can take part in soil carbon and Australian carbon credit units. Our free trade agreements have turbocharged our food and fibre exports. As I say, there is so much we have done for regional Australia.

We've also been supporting modern technology to address climate change in the agriculture space. We're doing practical things in this road map that actually make a difference and include increased productivity. Methane biodigesters are being supported in the technology space. That can be applied to dairies because with dairy, obviously, cattle cluster in one area so you can use their excrement to recycle and develop fertilisers, clear water and develop energy sources. The Minister for Agriculture and Northern Australia today mentioned research into various seaweeds and asparagopsis species. If you turn those into pellets they reduce methane in bovines. That is technology that we are exploring to see if it's applicable.

All these things are really critical in supporting regional Australia, but cherry picking support for regional councils, which are the major beneficiaries of all these great programs—we look after regional councils, because they are really important in regional Australia. The metropolitan councils have huge rates bases and little road infrastructure. We have been supporting the delivery of water infrastructure, with dams being built. We have given money to the states to get forward and get cracking on delivering extra water for agriculture and industry and for population growth. We have a decentralisation agenda. We have a minister dedicated to regional development. We've delivered the Inland Rail, which is going to improve freight between Melbourne and Sydney and all those regional areas. It will have a freight line going directly into Brisbane, and we are arguing to get it done up to Gladstone. They have all been done because the National Party is in this building, realising that if we get the right infrastructure, if we get connectivity—we've got the Sky Muster satellite up there through the NBN that's been given a double amount of extra capability—so internet connectivity, physical connectivity, infrastructure, tax treatment—you name it. Social and capital infrastructure in regional Australia is second to none and by the National Party.

Lisa Chesters (Bendigo, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government tries to give us a lecture about the geographical size of electorates, but we are talking about building infrastructure where people live. Are they seriously suggesting that more infrastructure money should go to electorates where there are vast amounts of land where nobody is living? There are chunks of the seat of Durack, which is the largest electorate in the country, where there are no towns and there are no people living there. Why would you say that an electorate like Durack, just because of the sheer size of it, should get more funding than an electorate like Bendigo, where you have the second-biggest regional city in Victoria? The regional electorates that I and the women who are participating in this debate from my side represent all have big regional cities as well as villages and towns. We represent regional Australia proudly. The government tries to claim regional Australia as their space, but it is not. In fact, there are probably more women on our side representing regional electorates than they have women in the entire lower house. That's how proud we are. That's how strong we are in representing the regions.

It is so disappointing that the Building Better Regions Fund is one that this government has quite frankly rorted in the way that it has. It should be renamed the 'Building Better Rorts Fund', because that's all it can be. We in Bendigo are trying to redevelop our airport. We're very proud of the work that's been done. The airport is trying to get upgraded. For the first time in decades we actually have Qantas flights coming in. They've been incredibly popular. We thought we had a chance in this round of the BBRF. The council put forward an application. There is money from the state government on the table. There is support from the major airline Qantas on the table. There is support from the local council, who are the owners of the airport. There are local businesses, such as local tourism operators, on the table. This round was supposed to be the tourism round. They were told, 'Apply for it.' They missed out on round 3. They missed out on round 4. Guess what: on round 5, they completely missed out.

I want to know: is it because our colour wasn't pink or green? The member for Mallee said that they had an opportunity to go in and specially lobby. Why didn't I get that opportunity? My town needs infrastructure funding too. My town needs it just as much as their towns need it. We are growing. We have growth pressures. Yet, under this government, we've received no support. It's not just my community that's missing out. In fact, it's a whole chunk of Labor regional electorates that are missing out. The women who will speak on our side will speak about how they've missed out. In this round, we got about $40,000 from this government and, as the member for Ballarat said, in total over the last few years it's about $2 million.

Compare that to the amounts received by the electorates of ministers who were also around the decision-making table. The electorate of the member for Maranoa, who is a minister in this government, received $57 million. The electorate of the former Deputy Prime Minister the member for Riverina received $27 million. The electorate of the former Deputy Prime Minister, then backbencher and now Deputy Prime Minister received $22.4 million. They're sitting around the table. They're not even trying to be fair or transparent. Somehow their seats are more needy than seats like Bendigo, Ballarat and Corangamite—and the list continues.

If you were genuine about building the regions and supporting regional communities, you'd be fair and share it equally. But we're not seeing that at all from this government. It is simply the 'building better rorts fund'. That's what we have on the table from this government. They try to disguise it by saying, 'Our electorates are geographically bigger.' That's not how democracy works. We all have about 110,000 voters in our electorates, and our regions are made up of a network of towns, hamlets, villages and regional centres. I have the City of Greater Bendigo in my electorate, but connected to that is a series of small towns such as the township of Maldon, with 1,500 people, and the township of Metcalfe, which has 100 people. They too need regional investment. I have a truckload of projects that need support. But, if we can't even get the Bendigo Airport upgraded through this government when we have Qantas, the state government, the City of Greater Bendigo and hundreds of local businesses on board, what chance does the Maldon RSL have? What chance does the Metcalfe town hall have? Zero under this government, because they're all about their own and not about anybody else.

Keith Pitt (Hinkler, National Party, Minister for Resources and Water) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I come back to what's in the title of the MPI. This is the allegation from those opposite: neglect of regional Australians and a misuse of taxpayers' money. Let's have a look at what's actually happened in my electorate and let's see them defend some of those things.

As I know you know, Mr Deputy Speaker Llew O'Brien, I just recently opened a palliative care facility at Hervey Bay to service the people of the Fraser Coast. Are those opposite seriously alleging that is a misuse of taxpayers' funds? This is $7 million from the Commonwealth. The state members are nowhere to be seen. The new state Labor member for Hervey Bay is in witness protection. You can't even get him out of his office. The people whom he and the state Labor member for Maryborough represent will have access to this facility at a very difficult time in their lives. There is $7 million for this facility, and I am absolutely proud to deliver that money to our region and our community for this purpose, because it will be incredibly strongly used in what is a difficult and emotional time for most individuals and their families. So these are the types of things that we are delivering into our communities, and those opposite allege this is a misuse of taxpayers' money.

Mr Deputy Speaker Llew O'Brien, I know that you're very passionate about road safety, so let's look at some of the things that we've delivered in regional communities in my electorate. There is $4 million for a set of overtaking lanes on the Isis Highway between Bundaberg and Childers, where a fatal accident occurred some years ago and local community members lost their lives. How is that a misuse of taxpayers' money?

We have $10 million on the table for the Buxton Road intersection; I know you drive past it, Mr Deputy Speaker Llew O'Brien. This was championed by the Deputy Mayor of Bundaberg and former mayor of the Isis district and Childers, Mr Bill Trevor. We know there is a small riverside village at the end of Buxton Road that uses this intersection with the Bruce Highway at the Isis River. It is an area of significant concern, and we have had $10 million on the table for a number of years, yet still we wait for the Queensland Labor government to actually deliver these facilities through the NPA that we have with Queensland for road construction and delivery. They continue to push it out, and they say they're about to get going somewhere soon.

But I'll turn to another part of the Hinkler Regional Deal, and that is the Royal Flying Doctor Service Aeromedical Training Centre. We've committed $15 million for this facility. In this MPI, those opposite are alleging this is a misuse of taxpayers' money—the Royal Flying Doctor Service! This is $15 million towards a new training facility which the RFDS will utilise with their new fleet when they replace their existing fleets as they come to the end of their operational life. We know that it will add more than 1,000 accommodation nights into the region of Bundaberg, just for the Royal Flying Doctor Service. The Bundaberg Regional Council has come on board with some land to support this facility. They were a little bit hesitant earlier—they wanted to charge $550,000 for it—but they did come to their senses, after some prodding. This is an incredibly worthy project that not only will help to train the Royal Flying Doctor Service pilots in their new aircraft but will continue to ensure that they are safe, in terms of their operation and competence into the future. This is a service that goes out into the regions and helps people not only in my electorate but right across parts of eastern Queensland and into the west. This is a significant investment, and I'm very pleased it is moving forward.

There is the $10 million for the multi-use conveyor at the Port of Bundaberg, which can help us add to the regional economy. That is 100 per cent funded by the Commonwealth, yet still we wait for the owner of the board of Bundaberg to deliver this piece of equipment. Who owns it? It's the Queensland state government, currently led by the Labor Party. They won't deliver what will build our local economy and will help our local port to grow and increase its capacity. Still we continue to wait.

The list just goes on and on and on, yet those opposite want to suggest that this is a misuse of taxpayers' money. That is just outrageous. If we get down to the Stronger Communities Program—Mr Deputy Speaker, as you know, every member of parliament has access to this small program—these grants are absolutely welcomed by local community groups. Imagine going to the local rowing club—the Bundaberg Rowing Club secured just over $7,000 for a new trailer—and telling them that is a misuse of taxpayer funds.

What are those opposite seriously suggesting? I know they want to make a lot of noise and a lot of political points, but the reality is places like Bundaberg Bowls Club; the Guides Queensland Elouera—new kitchen benches for them; the Bundaberg Small Bore Rifle Club; LiveFlight; Bundaberg Croquet Club—the list goes on and on and on. These are small community groups who can't raise this sort of money on lamington drives and sausage sizzles. I am very pleased to continue to deliver opportunities into my electorate and into regional Australia, not just to grow jobs but to help make our communities stronger and better into the future.

Susan Templeman (Macquarie, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think the last statement that the minister made highlights exactly what the problem is with the Building Better Regions Fund—or the 'building better rorts fund', as it is better known—and that is the comparison with the Stronger Communities Program. The point about Stronger Communities is that it is equal and fair. Every single MP is given an equal amount to share between the groups within their electorate. I hope every MP does what I do, and shares it as evenly across the electorate as possible. That's the whole point: there's an equity there. But these guys don't understand what it means to be fair.

The list of rorts that has occurred under this government almost leaves me speechless. But I'm not going to be speechless for the next four minutes! I'm not going to miss that opportunity. Essentially, what were seeing under these funds—so many of them—is that they're used for personal pork barrelling. They're using taxpayer funds to personally pork barrel within electorates. You would have thought that the most marginal seat in the country, perhaps, would be deserving of some of the largess. Sadly, no—$3 million has come to the seat of Macquarie.

Let's compare a tale of two regions. There is the seat of Macquarie, which is peri-urban and, interestingly, sitting right next to the seat of Calare. My seat is a mix of regional and quite remote areas, and then you've got Calare, with three big cities in it, including Lithgow—a real centre. Here is the comparison. The Blue Mountains and the Hawkesbury received $3 million. In fact, all of that went to just one small part of the electorate. Calare received $44.5 million. So two seats side by side, one with a National MP and one with a Labor MP—and, gee, doesn't that make you ask: how fair is this government being?

There is another example of where this government showed absolute preference for a National seat, and that was with a decision around a mobile blackspot tower. The tower was allocated to Mount Tomah, in my electorate, the heart of where the Gospers Mountain's fire went through. It is an area where there is no mobile reception and an area where many people pass through. It is an area very, very much in need of an improved mobile signal. Under the blackspot program a tower was allocated to Mount Tomah, but then something happened that no-one was told about and suddenly that tower was taken away from Mount Tomah and allocated to a National's electorate further west. There was no reason or anything given to the community to say, 'Hey, guys, we've found somewhere better to put this, and it's several hundred kilometres away from you.' That's the sort of behaviour of this government that is clearly designed to carry political favour, rather than do what is right and do what is needed.

I thought it was worth looking at my electorate and comparing it with other peri-urban sorts of electorates, and I looked at the electorate of Pearce in WA. Pearce is described as an outer-metropolitan electorate, and it received $19.6 million in funding. In contrast, Macquarie is considered provincial. So we are provincial, outside a capital city with the larger populations living in provincial towns. Outer-metropolitan is defined as an area situated in a capital city and containing large areas of recent suburban expansion. So there you go—a fund designed for regional Australia and more of it, $19.6 billion, went to Pearce, an outer-metropolitan seat—described as that in the government's own descriptions of seats—compared to a seat like mine, called a provincial seat, completely outside a capital city.

The way the allocations are happening is wrong. These people sit on what is largely a secret panel. All we know is that it's a ministerial panel. When you look at what ministers have been granted, you see: the agriculture minister, $52 million; the Leader of the Nationals $22.5 million; and the former Leader of the Nationals, $22.4 million. It has just got pork-barrelling written all over it! This is a group of people who rule for themselves, not for the country. (Time expired)

Pat Conaghan (Cowper, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This MPI, put on by the member for Ballarat, has no relevance to the misuse of taxpayers' money. What it should have been titled was 'Labor's attempt to mislead regional and rural Australia, whilst having a dig at the National Party at the same time'. I take great offence to being told that I don't care about anybody in my electorate and care only about my position. That is an offensive statement. That is akin to me saying to the member for Ballarat, 'You hate businessowners or people who want to make a dollar and get ahead in life.'

I make no apologies, zero apologies, for working hard to get money for my electorate, for getting out there and advocating on behalf of my people under the BBRF. It is offensive to say that it is a rort—because it is not. Time after time, my constituents come and say to me, 'Pat, how come I didn't get that grant I put in?' or 'Pat, how come we have put it in three, four or five times and we can't get it? We're going to give up.' That's because it is oversubscribed by six times—$1.2 billion this time around out of $250 million.

For the member across the floor to suggest that it has nothing to do with geography, she needs to go and have a look at a map. We represent five million hectares across Australia in our regions. They represent 1.5 million, and 1.3 million of that is in the member for Lingiari's electorate. So, in terms of what they get, they represent 17 per cent of regional and rural Australia. And guess what? They received 16 per cent in funding. That is only fair—and it is absolutely correct. So do not lecture to me. Do not lecture to the National Party. We represent regional and rural people. I make no apologies that in the last BBRF I received $6.5 million for a dementia village, to provide care for those in their later life with dementia. You're here criticising the fact that National Party members are out there representing people in their communities and get funding for dementia centres. That's right, you don't want us to go out there and ensure that we get those services for people in their later life who are suffering with dementia.

Opposition Members:

Opposition members interjecting—

Pat Conaghan (Cowper, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, you can't do that. You're being partisan with this.

Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Attorney General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member should withdraw the—

Llew O'Brien (Wide Bay, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Isaacs, is this a point of order?

Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Attorney General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a point of order.

Llew O'Brien (Wide Bay, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What is your point of order?

Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Attorney General) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It is a breach of standing orders to make the kind of offensive imputation that this member has just made.

Llew O'Brien (Wide Bay, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Isaacs will sit down. The member for Cowper.

Pat Conaghan (Cowper, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you. I also make no apologies—

An opposition member: You should withdraw!

I will not withdraw. I am speaking the truth!

Llew O'Brien (Wide Bay, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Isaacs is warned.

Pat Conaghan (Cowper, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I make no apologies about obtaining the $1.4 billion for my community, for the Coffs Harbour bypass, for taking 12,000 cars off the road every single day and providing a better amenity, and for one of my communities. To suggest that the National Party members don't care about their community and only care about their position, in the words of the member for Ballarat—she may need to do her homework, in future, before putting on these types of MPIs.

I could go on and on about the BBRF around Australia that has supported all communities, including those represented by Labor, all those projects that have helped our communities so far. To suggest that the National Party are dinosaurs, in terms of the climate change policy—you only need to look at what we have done for regional and rural Australians over the past two weeks. I can tell you, they are in a much better position now than they were two weeks ago.

Kristy McBain (Eden-Monaro, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Nobody on this side of the House is saying that the projects that have been funded are unworthy. Let's make that clear. No-one is saying that projects that have been funded on that side of the House are unworthy. What we're saying is that they should be equally funded for communities that we represent, our regional and rural communities. My community of Eden-Monaro is 42,000 square kilometres. It's the 15th largest electorate in this parliament. It's larger than 55 countries. To suggest that the space or the area of your electorate is the reason you should get funding is an absolute farce, because my communities are rural and regional.

It is incredibly frustrating that we have community members who have to move to the cities for opportunities. But when regional funding or funding that is identified as regional is going to metropolitan projects, you can see how that happens. Over 3,600 regional grants have gone to major city projects. There was $16½ million of taxpayer money meant for the regions that went to the Sydney Cricket Ground. There was $10 million of regional money that went to the North Sydney pool. Who gets the benefit of that? If funding goes to a cricket ground in Sydney, it is likely that a cricket club in Cooma or Tumut has missed out. We have tremendous sporting talent in our region—and a shout-out for Jade Allen who debuted for the Sydney Sixers last week. It's an amazing achievement given that she's been doing her pre-season training on facilities that can't even host regional local events.

I understand that some of this funding which goes into the cities will benefit regional people, but not all regional people—let's be clear about that! The fact is that the Building Better Regions Fund, which was supposed to build stronger regional communities into the future, has been a pork-barrelling exercise in round 5. Since 2018, 90 per cent of the Building Better Regions Fund has gone to coalition-held or targeted seats, when Labor holds a third of the eligible seats for this fund. And it's unsurprising that this is the case, because coalition MPs were given the opportunity to lobby for projects that didn't quite meet the program's criteria. I wasn't given that opportunity. It is an absolute joke that the Bega War Memorial Pool, which is 65 years old, didn't receive funding and yet the North Sydney pool did. It's an absolute joke!

The last round of the Building Better Regions Fund included a hardship clause for areas to apply for 100 per cent of funding because they've been under extreme circumstances. I could go on and on about how Eden-Monaro has suffered a prolonged drought, had over a million hectares burnt in the Black Summer bushfires and has suffered 28 declared natural disasters in the last couple of years—not to mention the economic impact of COVID lockdowns and border closures—and yet we received a pittance of funding. It's almost like the clause was made for regions hit hardest but that the minister made decisions not on that basis. I have six local councils, all of whom would love money from the Building Better Regions Fund. They have tens of thousands of kilometres of road network, and yet no money came.

The Australian public deserves to know that decisions over grant funding are made based on merit rather than political interest. Councils, businesses and communities across regional Australia need to know that they'll get funding regardless of who their representative is. It's not good enough in 2021 to say, 'Sorry your regional community doesn't matter to us if we don't represent you'.

A government member interjecting—

It's not outrageous! It's exactly what just happened! But it's not a surprise; it's actually not a surprise to people anymore. This is what people want; they're sick of the announcement and no delivery. Last week we spoke about the Emergency Response Fund, which has now grown to $4.7 billion. It has earned $700 million in interest and they've only committed $50 million of the fund. This is a fund for emergency response—for recovery and mitigation projects—but no money has flowed out of that fund yet. Australians are sick and tired of the continued and increasing misuse of taxpayers funding, and regional Australians are fed up with the power plays in the coalition that demand where the money goes. We need to restore faith in our democracy and this will only happen with a change of government. Regional Australians deserve better.

Rick Wilson (O'Connor, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank the member for Eden-Monaro for reminding me about the 'drought round', as we described it in WA. It was a round of the Building Better Regions Fund which was restricted to those areas that had been drought declared. At the time, my electorate, which covers 866,000 square kilometres and 38 local government authorities, was not drought declared. We were subsequently, but after that particular round of the BBRF closed. Therefore my communities, the 38 local government authorities across my electorate, had no access to funding during that round, which led to a very high demand and very high expectations of the most recent rounds.

Across my 38 local governments in O'Connor, I had 18 projects put up—significant projects of over a million dollars—for a total of $40 million. Part of the reason for that was not only that we were excluded from the previous round, due to not being drought declared at that time, but also because of the Western Australian Labor government, which, once they were elected in 2017, discontinued the previous coalition government's Royalties For Regions Fund. This fund was predicated on the royalties generated in regional Australia being reinvested in the towns where those royalties are generated—particularly in towns like Kalgoorlie, Leonora and Laverton across my electorate. They produce an enormous amount of royalty income for the Western Australian government and a billion dollars of those royalties was to be predicated to regional development. This year, in Western Australia, iron ore alone has produced $11 billion of royalties for the Western Australian government. None of that money is coming back to regional Western Australia through regional development programs at this point in time. What that's led to is the only source and access of regional development funding is the building better regions program. As I say, this led to a massive oversubscription with 18 projects at $40 million. I'm very proud that I wrote letters of support for every single one of those 18 projects. The member for Macquarie, who was on her feet recently—I'm told that some proponents in her electorate complained that they didn't receive letters of support from the member for Macquarie, so that's interesting. But, certainly in my case, I've advocated for every single one of those projects, and I was very pleased that six of those projects got across the line to a total of $14 million.

We've heard accusations by the Labor shadow spokesman and others in the media that this is a pork-barrelling exercise. Well, I can assure you that my seat, on 65 per cent two-party preferred, is not a marginal seat. It's not a seat that the government is trying to defend or trying to win. It's a regional seat that covers an enormous area with 110,000 hardworking citizens, spread across 38 local government authorities and over 120 different towns, that deserve support from their federal government.

I'll quickly run through some of the projects that we've funded. The Kalgoorlie-Boulder basketball stadium—Kalgoorlie has a state-league basketball team that have been playing in very, very substandard conditions, so that $5 million to go towards the $13 million project will be very well received. The Esperance Bay Yacht Club is to upgrade the marina, which will also allow cruise ships to dock their tenders, will increase the tourism visitation and is another important project of $2 million. The Albany Motorsport Park, with $5 million from us out of a $10 million project, will create a state of the art motor complex in Albany, which will, once again, draw hundreds if not thousands of visitors to the region. That was just touching on some of those projects.

I want to wrap up by talking about the Nyabing Progress Association. Nyabing is a little town of about 200 people, and the shire probably has around 400 people in it. At the recent regional Australia committee visit to my home town of Katanning, Rachel Browne, who's the treasurer of the association, appeared and explained that they needed a new community hub in their town. The community, and I'm talking about a community of less than 200 people—member for Corangamite, before you get on your feet—raised over a million dollars to put towards a project, a community hub that they needed, and we contributed $900,000. I'm very proud of that and I'm very proud of them. (Time expired)

Libby Coker (Corangamite, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's breathtaking that the Morrison-Joyce government apparently considers the Building Better Regions Fund to be its own re-election fund. The fund has delivered over $1 billion of taxpayers' money, but here's what the Morrison-Joyce government isn't telling you: over 90 per cent of the funding has gone to coalition-held or targeted seats. In contrast, Labor-held electorates received a meagre 14 per cent of the funding. It's no wonder the Morrison-Joyce government has become known to communities, including mine, as the government of rorts. It's clear for all to see why this government doesn't want to introduce legislation for an integrity commission that has real teeth—it's because this government's dirty deeds would be exposed by an integrity commission. The Prime Minister must explain to people in Labor-held seats why they are paying their taxes, seemingly to contribute to a coalition government's re-election.

Then there's the fact that 55 per cent of regional grants have gone to cities. This means 3,682 regional grants have gone to major city projects compared to only 309 projects in areas classified as remote or very remote. The Morrison-Joyce government likes us to know how important regional development is to them, but the figures reveal just the opposite. As we know, there was $16.5 million of taxpayers' money which was meant to go to regions but went to the Sydney Cricket Ground. And here's another one: $10 million of regional money is going to a pool in North Sydney. How is that regional? Where's the benefit for regional Australia in that?

There's a long list of equally ridiculous examples of regional funds ending up anywhere but in the regions. Do you know what? The people of regional Australia and the people of my electorate are wise to this government's deception and to its neglect of our regions.

This week there have been claims by the Nationals that they are fighting for the regions around zero emissions policy. A memo to the deputy leader on this: you need to represent regional Australians on climate change for 52 weeks a year, not just when it is an electoral imperative. For example, in January 2020, the federal Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources released a discussion paper on the development of an offshore clean energy bill to incentivise and regulate offshore renewable projects in Australia, but, despite promises to introduce legislation by mid-2021, there is still no sign of a draft bill. Credible offshore wind projects in my region have been waiting more than five years for this legislation. And this is the way it is likely to continue with this government saying it will only invest in technologies like solar and wind when there is a clear market failure or where it will save jobs. What about creating new clean energy jobs in our regions? Surely renewable energy projects for the regions are an absolute no brainer.

Another no brainer is support for our tourism sector across our regions during this pandemic. During COVID lockdowns I implored the Morrison government to provide desperately needed financial support to the tourism sector in my region under the Recovery for Regional Tourism program. Despite a most significant loss of revenue, the Surf Coast, Bellarine and Great Ocean Road regions completely missed out. The failure to include these key tourism destinations was in direct contradiction to the government's own program guidelines, which clearly state that gross value added by international visitors and tourism employment within the region is a key factor in determining funding. I also note that seven of the nine eligible funds for the fund were in LNP-held seats. Is that equitable?

Australia is caught up in a critical shortage of timber, and it's particularly hurting fast growing regions like mine. It's hurting construction, it's impacting jobs and opportunities for apprenticeships and ultimately it's affecting economic prosperity. The Morrison-Joyce government promised to meet the one billion plantation trees target in 2018, but this government, as usual, has failed to do anything. In fact, a concessional loan program set up to help meet the one billion trees target is not yet even open. An amount of $500 million was promised before the last election towards this target. Once again: hollow words.

When it comes to regional Australians, this government speaks big but delivers little. It delivers without equity and it delivers not for regional people. (Time expired)

Tony Pasin (Barker, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What a beat-up! These people come into this place and I think their thesis is effectively that 90 per cent of the funding has gone to coalition and coalition-target seats. Well, the reality is I can tell you 100 per cent of the funding went to coalition and coalition-target seats, because we're targeting every single seat in this place. That's the reality. You know what they say about statistics: lies, damn lies and statistics. This is a cruel trick by those opposite to pretend they're on message. They come in and want to whinge and whine and carp, always pointing out these so-called inequities.

If I take the member for Macquarie's argument to its logically extent, she basically says, 'Don't worry about the merits of the application, just apply funding evenly across electorates.' What that would ultimately result in is a situation where applications with very high merit that had gone through a rigorous application process would be disadvantaged and poor applications that hadn't received the necessary work required to get applications over the line would be advantaged. You've got to think about what that means. That means we'd end up with this kind of mismatch across the country where people would ultimately say, 'There's no point really working hard to develop a good application because at the end of the day we'll be punished for an application so we might as well make rubbish applications.' We don't want to see that. We want to see merit based assessment. In fact, if we applied that rule—I will call it the member for Macquarie's rule—then those opposite would no doubt come in here and say, 'This is ridiculous, because there should be a merit assessment in relation to this.'

The reality is: this is a program about building better regions. There might be a hint in the title—'building better regions'. For me, that means stronger, more resilient regions. In my electorate, which spans 64,000 square kilometres—larger than Croatia!—I have some very, very, very small communities. If you went to the community of Karoonda, in the east Murray, with its own local government, less than 1,100 people live in that local government area. The member for Corangamite wants to have that community compete on an even footing with Geelong. You can't be serious, with respect! Geelong is not a regional community. From where I'm standing, it looks like, basically, a capital city. Quite frankly, from the people of Karoonda's perspective, it's a metropolis.

The reality is: if we don't do something serious about the trajectory of population distribution in this country, projections have us ending up, by 2050—and there has been a lot of talk about where we'll end up in 2050—with two megacities in this country. I don't want to live in an Australia which is effectively Melbourne and Sydney, with all due respect to those people who represent those fine capitals in this place. The heart of Australia beats in our regions. I want a basketball player with talent at Murray Bridge to enjoy similar facilities. He or she will never enjoy exactly the same facilities as people living in our capital cities, but I'd like them to enjoy comparable facilities. Quite frankly, our next generation of Australian Olympians disproportionately comes from regional Australia. I want older Australians living in small communities to enjoy similar facilities to those in the cities.

To those opposite who come in here and say, 'This is just another rort, because 90 per cent of the funding went to coalition and coalition target seats': this is just playing with statistics. You're losing credibility daily. You didn't come in here after the emergency round, the bushfire round, and say, 'Oh well, we did particularly well in bushfire affected communities.' Of course bushfire communities did well in that round; it was deliberately targeted at drought and other emergencies.

The reality is: the people of Australia vote with their feet. They know that the coalition—proud Liberals, proud Nationals—represent regional Australia and do it well. That's why we keep getting returned, disproportionately, in regional Australia.

Llew O'Brien (Wide Bay, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The discussion has concluded.