Tony Sheldon (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government, Senator Watt. I refer to the Albanese Labor government's commitment to reform the way the Commonwealth funds infrastructure and undo a decade of bad decisions. What did the infrastructure review released by the minister today find?

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Sheldon. I know Senator Sheldon, along with all senators on this side of the chamber, understands the importance of infrastructure to local communities as well as knowing how important it is that Australians are able to trust the promises of their government. As we all know, the previous government left the infrastructure investment pipeline in a complete mess, and the review that Minister King released today makes that clear.

Bridget McKenzie (Victoria, National Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure, Transport and Regional Development) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

What about Qatar Airways?

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm not surprised that, of all people, Senator McKenzie might have to say something about this—of course, the master of the spreadsheet sitting over there with her green highlighter out, colouring up the National Party projects and every now and then a Liberal Party project, but mostly National Party projects. I know today is an embarrassing day for Senator McKenzie and all members of the National Party in—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister Watt, please resume your seat. Senator Birmingham?

Simon Birmingham (SA, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On a point of order—and, indeed, I think Senator Colbeck just nailed it—he's not even being relevant to the question he was asked as a dixer. But of course he is also seeking to impugn a senator and imply motives. Senator Watt should withdraw.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Watt.

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They are a bit toey about allocated spreadsheets. As we all know, the previous government left the infrastructure investment pipeline—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Watt, sorry, I just assumed I wouldn't have to repeat Senator Birmingham's request for you to withdraw. My apologies. I should have. Senator Wong?

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I apologise to the chamber. I was not listening with all of my full attention, but I would be grateful if you could be clear, at least across the table, with what words you are asking him to withdraw.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Wong, it is my habit to specifically request for personal reflections never to be repeated, and I really don't want to diverge from that. Senator Watt usually withdraws. I think it was close, but, in the interests of a calm chamber, I would ask that the comments be withdrawn.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Foreign Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

There was a reference to some of the evidence which was presented to the Senate about what occurred in relation to that program, including the colour-coded spreadsheets. That's on the public record.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No. There was a reference to Senator McKenzie. In the interests of the calmness of the chamber, I would ask Senator Watt to withdraw.

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I withdraw.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Watt.

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The review that Minister King released today found a pipeline of infrastructure inherited from the coalition that was jam-packed with backed-up projects that were announced without the support of states or territories, poorly scoped, underfunded at the outset or designed simply to win votes. The infrastructure program was spiralling out of control under the coalition, having blown out from 150 to almost 800 projects. It has become clear that the previous government was addicted to announcements and colour-coded spreadsheets and neglected the hard work of building real infrastructure. While they may have had—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Minister Watt, please resume your seat. Senator Rennick?

Gerard Rennick (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Point of order, Chair: I'm sick and tired of the reference to colour-coded spreadsheets.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Senator Rennick. That is not—

Gerard Rennick (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As an accountant—

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Rennick, resume your seat.

Honourable senators interjecting—

Senator Rennick! Order across the chamber! Senator Rennick, I am rather surprised because you do normally sit when asked to, and I remind you that, when I require you to sit, you sit. Minister Watt, please continue.

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

As Senator Wong has pointed out, it was a pretty uncomfortable episode for all Australians to have a government led by colour coded spreadsheets, and even now they still boast about it. The coalition's legacy and the path they set for this nation was $33 billion in cost blowouts and an inability to add any new infrastructure projects to the pipeline until the 2033. This is a breathtaking indictment on the Liberals' and Nationals' economic management and their failure to genuinely deliver for our communities. That's the coalition's legacy; under them, we would have had no new infrastructure projects until 2033.

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Sheldon, first supplementary?

Tony Sheldon (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Under the Liberals and Nationals, the $120 billion investment pipeline was left in a total mess, as you outlined: underfunded, poorly prepared and with out-of-control cost blowouts. How is the Albanese Labor government demonstrating its commitment to nation-building infrastructure and bringing certainty to the infrastructure sector?

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We will be implementing the recommendations of this independent review, and that's because, in the words of the reviewers, 'There are projects in the infrastructure investment pipeline that do not demonstrate merit, lack any national strategic rationale and do not meet the Australian government's national investment priorities.' What a great investment program! What a great government you were! What great economic managers you were!

Unlike the coalition, we will be investing in projects that enhance productivity by removing traffic bottlenecks and building resilience in our supply chains. We are committed to a better approach, focusing on delivering nationally significant infrastructure that aligns with our broader national priorities in housing and critical minerals. We'll be investing in projects, as I said, that remove traffic bottlenecks and build resilience in our supply chains—projects that improve liveability of the cities and regions we call home and projects that contribute to sustainability and reduce our emissions, like public transport.

We're also reshaping how we fund projects to ensure a genuine partnership with the states. (Time expired)

Sue Lines (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Senator Sheldon, second supplementary?

Tony Sheldon (NSW, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Under the Liberals and Nationals, the number of infrastructure projects in the pipeline blew out from 150 to 180, but, as always, delivery was a secondary consideration. How will the infrastructure and its outcome allow the government to invest more in the projects that matter?

Murray Watt (Queensland, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

They are great questions. This review and the implementation of it will have real benefits for Australians, allowing our government to end the waste and rorts that we saw under the coalition and invest more in the projects that matter. Over the next 10 years, more than 400 individual ongoing projects are expected to be completed or substantially developed, including the north-south corridor in Adelaide, where we have proposed an additional $2.7 billion dollars in addition to the funding that was already committed; Logan and Gold Coast faster rail, where we've proposed an additional $1.8 billion on top of what we've already committed; the M1 Pacific Motorway extension to Raymond Terrace through the Hunter, where works on the next section will start imminently; and METRONET, in Western Australia, where we've proposed an additional $1 billion.

Those opposite may claim there are cuts while at the same time saying we should cut government spending, but you wouldn't want to look for consistency. They're making it up. We're not taking a single cent out of the infrastructure investment of the federal government.