Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Northern Australia) Share this | Hansard source

I'm continuing my remarks, having spoken on these bills a bit before question time.

Just to further outline the opposition's position: I was saying before that Labor absolutely supports the government's desire to provide additional support for farmers and rural communities who are experiencing drought. All of us want to do that. This is about whether what the government is putting forward is the best way to do so. When I was speaking previously, I was particularly focusing on the fact that by setting up this Future Drought Fund, the government is raiding an alternative fund which is still very important in rural and regional communities, and that is the Building Australia Fund.

The Building Australia Fund, which was established by the last federal Labor government, is a $3.9 billion fund that this government has failed to draw down on, failed to access and failed to utilise, even though the fund can support projects in drought-affected communities across transport infrastructure, like roads, rail, urban transport and ports; communications infrastructure such as broadband; energy infrastructure; and water infrastructure. All the kinds of things that rural and regional communities are crying out for! Why is it that the government has failed to spend money from the Building Australia Fund, has left it in tact, has not drawn on it and is not building any of that infrastructure that is needed, whether it be in rural or regional communities or in urban communities? Now it wants to raid it for an alternative purpose. The reason is that the government fundamentally does not like how the Building Australia Fund is set up and the level of probity that is required to make sure that the money is well spent. Since being elected six years ago, the government has tried on four separate occasions to dismantle the Building Australia Fund.

As I've mentioned, the Building Australia Fund was established by Labor in 2008 under the Nation-building Funds Act 2008. Labor established this fund with the explicit purpose of being free of politics. Under the Nation-building Funds Act criteria were developed which must be applied by Infrastructure Australia before projects, other than broadband projects, can be recommended for funding. The fund is built on four key principles. Firstly, projects should address national infrastructure priorities. Secondly, they should demonstrate high benefits and effective use of resources. Thirdly, projects should efficiently address infrastructure needs. Fourthly, they should demonstrate they achieve established standards in their implementation and management.

It is these key principles around independent, transparent decision-making that the Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison Liberal National governments so despise. Their problem, when it all boils down to it, is that the Building Australia Fund has four principles around transparency and independent decision-making and making sure that projects are actually needed and will provide value to the country. The Liberals' and Nationals' problem with the Building Australia Fund is that it doesn't have a fifth principle—one that allows for pork barrelling to win seats in marginal Liberal and National areas of the country. If it had that fifth principle, I reckon we'd get the support of the coalition, because we know that that's the way they have always used these types of infrastructure funds and various other regional funds that they have established. It is this inability to pork barrel for their mates that those opposite hate so much about the Building Australia Fund. While these bills set up consultation processes for the new Future Drought Fund, the minister can ignore them—just like the health minister so often ignores expert advice with respect to the Medical Research Future Fund. The member for Ballarat made that point yesterday in the House. We've got this series of funds that have been established by the government, theoretically with expert advice processes to help shape the decisions, only to be ignored by ministers within this government.

To be frank, under the bills as they're being put forward the minister will be able to support his favourite communities, to pork barrel funding into his preferred seats for the benefit of the National Party at the expense of so many drought stricken parts of rural and regional Australia. Having visited Darwin twice now since my appointment as shadow minister for northern Australia, and becoming more familiar with the extent of the drought that exists in the Northern Territory, which is really crippling the cattle industry and many other communities across the Northern Territory, I'll be very interested to see how many projects will be funded out of this Future Drought Fund in the electorate of Lingiari, held by Labor, covering a drought affected area. Let's just wait and see how many projects in that area get funded compared to projects in seats that the National Party have a direct interest in. The seat of Gilmore on the south coast of New South Wales is another area that's badly affected by drought at the moment. It's held by Labor. Let's wait and see how many projects in the electorate of Gilmore get funding out of this fund, or whether, mysteriously, all the funds flow through to electorates held by the National Party.

What we have is the government abolishing a fund that was established to provide a strategic, transparent approach to infrastructure investment, led by the independent Infrastructure Australia. This is particularly important at a time when the Reserve Bank is highlighting the need for infrastructure spending to support Australia's flagging economy. Indeed, the very fund the government is abolishing, the Building Australia Fund, could be used in these current economic conditions to help stimulate and support the very communities that are affected by drought. It does not make sense that they are not drawing down on the Building Australia Fund now for projects that have been recommended by Infrastructure Australia to get investment into the economy now in communities across the country. It is pure politics at the expense of rural and regional communities that are doing it so tough right now. These communities need help from the federal government now, not in three months, not in six months, not in next year—now. Instead, what they're getting from this government is a fund that will only start distributing funds more than 12 months away. It's not going to give rural and regional communities the support that they need right now.

If the government were to choose to not utilise the Building Australia Fund, there's absolutely no reason that the government can't make an appropriation for drought funding right now. We have been calling for that to happen. There's no reason that the government couldn't decide today to make an appropriation, to make funding available for drought ridden communities now, not in over 12 months time. I make the point that there's nothing that stopped the government from having made an appropriation at any point over the last six years for drought funding. Of course, they haven't done so. Labor has said time and again we stand ready to support that.

We believe action should be taken now, not in over a year's time, to alleviate the social and economic costs in drought-affected communities and a strategic plan developed for future drought-proofing Australia, including through substantial investment in infrastructure, but these investments must be transparent and made on the best available science and the best available advice to government about what will work in the long term to support our regions. But the hurried introduction of these bills only demonstrates that they have been asleep at the wheel for the past six years—asleep at the wheel on the drought and on water reform, asleep at the wheel on utilising the Building Australia Fund to build infrastructure, leaving regional communities to suffer for far too long.

Rural and regional Australians need support and action now, not more years spent in consultation. Instead, this government is offering $100 million in about a year's time and another $100 million a year after that, not the $5 billion that they go around using as a headline figure of the fund. In fact this fund won't even reach $5 billion in size for another nine years. It's another furphy that's being put around by this government. It is just $200 million, with not a cent to flow for about a year. It is the removal of the $3.9 billion Building Australia Fund for just $200 million in this term of government for drought funding. As the leader of the Labor Party said in the House last night, you don't even have to count all the zeros to know that $3.9 billion out and $200 million in is a pretty bad deal. As Labor has repeated time and again, we support greater investment in our rural and regional communities at this time of drought, but the maths are pretty straightforward and the politics are even clearer. The new Future Fund will be a pork-barrel vehicle for the National Party just as we've seen so many other times from the National Party, and it will be to the detriment of communities right across the country.

The Labor Party will not oppose these bills. We support the additional resources to our rural and regional communities, but, when we return to government, we will restructure Infrastructure Australia and make it a strong body once again. We will ensure that this is a genuinely independent board of experts, making sure that it can do its job in driving microeconomic reform and having proper cost-benefit analysis and rigour in terms of infrastructure. We will establish in the future a fund like the Building Australia Fund because it is essential that there be a funding component to support Infrastructure Australia's rigorous, strategic work.

In conclusion, I repeat that there is absolutely no reason that government cannot make an appropriation for drought funding right now. They could have done so at any time during the last six years. Labor has stood ready to support rural and regional communities right across the country, but, for this government, it's all about the politics. You've even seen it in the run-up to the debate today. All the media has been full of government ministers and government backbenchers out there describing this bill as a test of Labor. It's very clear what this government is about. It's all just about politics. It's all about finding wedges for Labor. It almost feels like they haven't realised that they just won the election. They can actually get on and govern in the best interests of the country rather than trying to run around constantly finding wedges with which to test Labor.

Australians don't want it.

Senator Hume interjecting—

Sorry, Senator Hume?