Glenn Sterle (WA, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

You call it long-term vision—well, it was not all that long term, Senator Bernadi, because the previous government has been well and truly exposed. I suggest you will find this very interesting reading: all three volumes, all 20 recommendations.

A heritage park in that fantastic state of Western Australia received over $660,000 of taxpayers’ money and three years later there is still no construction. It has not begun, three years later! I have here some quotes from the previous minister, Mr Vaile. In November 2007, he said that the program delivered ‘fantastic outcomes to regional Australia’. Three years later, still nothing has been built there. This is absolutely incredible.

This example of maladministration is not on its own. A significant number of questionable episodes occurred in that time, and I would like to highlight a few of them for the benefit of senators opposite. One is the Gunnedah ethanol refinery project in the electorate of Gwydir, which was held, as we all know, by the former leader of the Nationals, Mr John Anderson. The project was to help Primary Energy build an ethanol bio-refinery plant in Gunnedah to the value of no less than $1.1 million. Mr Langhorne, John Anderson’s chief-of-staff, actively intervened in the Gunnedah ethanol refinery project after the department had advised that the claimed benefits of the refinery were ‘difficult to substantiate’. He told the then junior minister, Ian Campbell, to give $1.1 million to the project in his boss’s electorate of Gwydir, which was abolished following the redistribution. For his efforts, Mr Langhorne was given a senior advisory position in the Prime Minister’s office. The role of junior minister went to Mr Jim Lloyd, who was also advised by the department not to proceed on a $1.1 million taxpayer funded project. Guess what? Mr Lloyd approved the project, and the plant has never been built.

Another example is AUSGUM sawmill operations in the electorate of Maranoa—there is a familiar ring here: it keeps coming back to National Party seats—held by Mr Bruce Scott. The project was to buy equipment for AUSGUM’s Emerald sawmill operations, with a grant to the value of $130,000. Mr Scott supported an application for buying the equipment. The department advised the then parliamentary secretary—no prize for guessing, Mrs De-Anne Kelly—to oppose the project. However, Mrs Kelly disagreed and wrote to then minister John Anderson, asking him to waive a program criterion—just waive it; have it go away; lose it. Mr Anderson disagreed but suggested that an alternative project for AUSGUM might be suitable for funding. A new application for machinery to be installed in Emerald was approved, but the equipment was installed in Gympie instead. The company provided no receipts, thereby breaching the funding agreement.

Another example is Country Homes and Cabins in Emerald. Once again, it is in the seat of Maranoa, with the same member, Mr Scott, and the same party. The project was for the construction of a transportable house-building factory to the value of a half a million dollars plus GST. On 11 February 2005 the department advised that the application not be approved as it did not meet several criteria. The local member, Mr Bruce Scott, wrote to the then member for Parkes, Mr John Cobb, who is the current member for Calare, requesting that the decision be reconsidered. He did not like the answer and wanted the department to reconsider it. After an external applicant and project viability assessment, Mr Cobb approved the funding, but his recorded reasons for approving the funding failed to address all the concerns raised by the department.

We also have an example of this in Western Australia. I mentioned earlier the Peel Region Tourist Railway, which is in the electorate of Canning, held by Mr Don Randall from the Liberal Party. This project, as I said, involved the restoration of the historic railway to the value of $845,000. In February 2004 the then Prime Minister, Mr John Howard, announced this grant to the Peel Region Tourist Railway—no fewer than four months before an application was received by the department. An internal review of the project and the development of the business plan by the proponent failed to demonstrate the viability of the project in its existing form. A scope and budget for the project were varied. The funding agreement for this project was not able to be executed until 24 January 2007—nearly three years after the former Prime Minister’s announcement. I know things move slowly in government, but this is three years. The project is yet to be executed. The future of the line is now in doubt, following rising costs and bushfire damage.

Another example is the expansion of seed and grain breeding by Keith Seeds in the electorate of Barker, held by the Liberals’ Patrick Secker. The project involves the expansion of seed and grain breeding, marketing, processing and fractionation at Keith Seeds and is funded to the value of $571,000. Following an unsuccessful application to the Dairy Regional Assistance Program for funding, Keith Seeds applied to the Regional Partnerships program. Mr Patrick Secker MP, the local member, provided a letter of support for the project and was later identified—I should not laugh; it is not funny—as a company shareholder. On two occasions, the department recommended against funding this project because it failed to meet the program’s assessment criteria. But the ministerial committee proceeded to approve funding for the project.

I like it when those on the other side, the opposition, ask us what we are going to do. I will tell senators opposite what the Rudd Labor government is going to do. We do care about rural and regional Australia, and rural and regional Australia do care about what promises are made to them, what can be funded, what cannot be funded and what is just an episode in vote buying. The Howard government’s attitude was one of ‘whatever it takes, just get the vote’. When the Rudd Labor government begins spending money on discretionary grants, it must be properly administered—and in the future it will be. Ministers will not be able to make decisions on discretionary grants for their own electorate. I think that is a very, very good thing. When we hear some of the examples that I referred to earlier, we can understand why we have to go to this process. We need discretion. We cannot have ministers running around the country pork-barrelling their mates in marginal coalition seats—but, sadly, that has occurred in the last few years.

The Rudd Labor government has a very strong commitment to ensuring the highest standards of public administration and accountability and delivering real benefits to people living in regional Australia. I think everyone can appreciate it will take time to sort out the mess left behind by the Howard government—there is no question about that—but the Rudd Labor government makes no apology for taking the time needed to get it right for regional Australia.