John Madigan (Victoria, Democratic Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Tonight Opera Australia performed in the Great Hall of Parliament House. Many may be surprised that I appreciate opera, but then again many are surprised about many things I say. Tonight's performance was high theatre in the best sense, but it had nothing of the ridiculousness we see in parliament week after week. Is the Australian public impressed by what they see here? Are they involved and interested, or have they switched off? Writing for The Conversation this week, Robert Douglas, Emeritus Professor at Australian National University, asked an important question: who speaks for the public interest? Who speaks for the welfare and wellbeing of the general public? Clearly, it is not the parliament, according to Professor Douglas. He said:

Grassroots common sense and decency lie at the heart of two growing movements to reassert the voice of the people in the management of our local and national affairs. Kitchen table conversations and community organising could perhaps help to reinvigorate Australian democracy.

Professor Douglas decries the influence of lobby groups. He says: 'For various reasons, politicians listen to them.' Certainly, my Canberra diary is full of back-to-back meetings with lobby groups. But who speaks for the future welfare and wellbeing of our children? And where are the grassroots common sense and decency he talks about? Professor Douglas says we need to restore balance to the political equation.

Tonight I would like to focus on matters of national importance. It has been three months since the Treasurer handed down his budget, and supposedly there have been three months of negotiation since. But it has been three months of tit for tat between the opposition and the government. What about the real issues? What about the matters that impact on Australian families and workers? What about the issues that impact on rural and regional communities and small businesses? What about the issues that impact on Australian manufacturing and our agricultural sector? What about Australia's fuel security? Those of us who are old enough to remember petrol strikes will recall hundreds of Australians queueing up to put fuel into their cars—just last year we ran out of diesel. What about the sell-off of our farms to overseas interests? And, not least of all, what about the unfair state of our housing market?

But first things first. Our manufacturing sector provides nine per cent of all jobs; it contributes nine per cent to Australia's GDP. With a national gas crisis looming, Manufacturing Australia—yes, admittedly a lobby group—anticipates that we could lose 200,000 jobs. That is $28 billion of economic value that could be wiped out if the government does not act. Natural gas makes up 15 to 40 per cent of the cost basis for a range of products, including fertiliser, alumina, cement and bricks. What is the government doing about this? What plans do they have to be proactive on this crucial issue? We are suffering a gas crisis because of decisions made by a previous government. Why don't we have sufficient domestic gas reserves for domestic and industrial consumption? What's the current government's answer? Fracking? Shale gas? In short, everyone is getting fracked—the environment, our farming communities, manufacturers, the car industry and the list goes on. The government crow about getting rid of the carbon tax. They might eventually do something about the RET. Meanwhile, unemployed Australians will have to apply for 40 jobs a month—and where are the jobs?

My Fair Trade Workers Rights Bill 2013 was introduced on 20 June last year. It sought to promote international labour standards and human rights whilst increasing the competitiveness of Australian businesses. Seven days later I put up the Fair Trade (Australian Standards) Bill. This bill was last debated on 5 December. Senator Edwards had this to say about the bill:

This bill has the effect of obliging Australia to adopt import requirements that will place further unnecessary obstacles in front of potential trade opportunities.

'Further unnecessary obstacles'? The Fair Trade (Australian Standards) Bill would require Australia's trading partners to ensure that companies that export goods to Australia take responsibility for ensuring that their manufactured goods meet Australian standards prior to being sold on the Australian market. The bill would require the minister to ensure appropriate standards are included in any trade agreement that Australia enters into with another country. This is not unreasonable. This is not anti free trade; this is fair trade. It is fair trade that will support Australian manufacturers, Australian workers and Australian families.

Now I move to the farming sector. This was once the backbone of the Australian economy. Why? We had an abundance of land, water and demand. Yet we have farmers committing suicide at a rate twice the national average. This is a complex issue. In my home state of Victoria, I have seen firsthand the stress and anguish banks impose on farmers. I have seen the predatory behaviour of the finance and legal sectors, intent on raping our farmers.

Last year, Senator Xenophon and I introduced the Reserve Bank Amendment (Australian Reconstruction and Development Board) Bill 2013. The bill sought to establish a new board under the Reserve Bank which would be made up of the Governor of the Reserve Bank as an ex officio member, one representative of the bank and seven other members with rural or agricultural experience, including at least one economist, accountant, banker, representative of the states and territories, and farmer. The new board would determine what policies they create and implement in order to assist Australian businesses in the agricultural sector in a way which most advances our national interest. The board would use the capital and other abilities of the Reserve Bank to ensure its self-formulated policy took full effect. The board would be directly accountable to both the House of Representatives and the Senate or a committee of either. The board's policies would be subordinate to the Reserve Bank board's policies and so, if there were any overlap or inconsistencies, the Reserve Bank Board's policies would still have full effect. The bill is currently before committee. Senator Xenophon and I would like to see public hearings take place. What the Australian agricultural sector needs most from the government is positive action.

Now, in my remaining minutes, I want to talk about fuel security. As a member nation of the International Energy Agency, Australia is required to have 90 days of liquid fuel security—but this is a minimum. The UK has 268 days, Korea has 222 days and the United States has 174 days. Even Luxembourg, with a population of 500,000-odd people, has 94 days. Australia has 71 days. Of that, around 14 days is still at sea, five to 10 days worth are in crude oil tanks at refineries and three days worth is in our cars. That is right—the largest portion of Australia's liquid fuel reserves are still at sea. Is this an issue on the radar of our government? What will be their response when Australian motorists are possibly queuing for fuel?

Over recent weeks, we have been discussing the budget. We have been discussing how it will impact on people. But we must not forget what sustains us, our communities and our families. Without a strong manufacturing sector, we are dead. Without a strong agricultural sector, we will starve. Without a policy of liquid fuel security, we will be at the mercy of sudden external threat. These are the important issues, and I urge the government to address them.