The SPEAKER ( Hon. Bronwyn Bishop ) took the chair at 9:00, made an acknowledgement of country and read prayers.
That paragraph 3 of the resolution agreed to on 15 May 2014 relating to the appropriation bills be varied as follows:
(3) at the conclusion of the proceedings on Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2014-2015,
(a) separate questions being put without further debate on the motions for the second readings and any further motions necessary to conclude consideration of the Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2014-2015, Appropriation (Parliamentary Departments) Bill (No. 1) 2014-2015, and Appropriation Bill (No. 5) 2013-2014; and
(b) then the question being put without further debate on the motion for the second reading of the Appropriation Bill (No. 6) 2013-2014, and then the bill being considered in detail for a period not exceeding 15 minutes, at which time any questions necessary to conclude the detail stage being put, and any questions being put without further debate on any further motions necessary to conclude consideration of the bill; and
Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment Bill 2014
That this bill be now read a second time.
The penalties [under the current Act] are rather beneficially low…beneficial to wrongdoers.
I actually believe there is a higher responsibility for us as guardians of workers' money to protect that money and to act diligently and honestly. The reality is I do not have any issue with increasing the level of requirements and penalties on trade unions for breaching basic ethics like misappropriation of funds.
Excise Tariff Amendment (Fuel Indexation) Bill 2014
That this bill be now read a second time.
Customs Tariff Amendment (Fuel Indexation) Bill 2014
That this bill be now read a second time.
Fuel Indexation (Road Funding) Bill 2014
That this bill be now read a second time.
Fuel Indexation (Road Funding) Special Account Bill 2014
That this bill be now read a second time.
Australian Renewable Energy Agency (Repeal) Bill 2014
That this bill be now read a second time.
Asset Recycling Fund Bill 2014
Asset Recycling Fund (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2014
I am neither for or against privatisation full stop, but it must be considered on a case-by-case basis. Sometimes it might be appropriate to sell a public asset—
I think in spite of that, I guess there is substantial disillusionment when you can have something such as the privatisation of the Commonwealth Bank without the Left making a statement in opposition to that. And I think that there's considerable disillusionment amongst the rank and file of the party, not just the Left, but I think it crosses the factions.
Oh, I think that there is perhaps a view at a rank and file level that the Left does have to be a bit more vocal, that the Left does have to differentiate its political perspective from the views of the Government at a time when it's necessary, whether it be the Commonwealth Bank—
Infrastructure Australia is already looking at ways to encourage the sale and recycling of government owned infrastructure to fund new projects. The Australian Government should continue to work with State and Territory governments in assessing potential assets for sale and opportunities for better use of existing assets, for example, through pricing of asset use.
The key issue is that most projects in the top two highest priority lists, adding up to over $A25 billion, are either road extensions and upgrades, or urban railways or busways. While worthwhile, these projects will not be suited for a capital recycling program until a comprehensive user pays system is in place. In fact, there are only two projects in those lists that would fit well into a capital recycling program, namely the Oakajee Port (A$5.4 billion) and the Darwin East Arm Port Expansion (A$336 million). This is well short of the revenue that may be raised by asset sales and so recycling of capital would not be very effective.
This means that capital recycling, while a potentially worthwhile concept in a world where governments cannot borrow directly, will be at best one additional tool for funding infrastructure. At worst, the proceeds from the sale of assets will be spent to ensure future electoral support, on projects that would not pass a cost-benefit test.
EIF funding has been used to develop new research and education infrastructure across universities, VET institutions, research centres and institutes and the CSIRO (pertaining to the SKA). The provision of modern research capabilities comes at a cost. To date 71 infrastructure projects have been funded by EIF to the sum of $2.4 billion. This included $643m in funding for pure research infrastructure—not including funding for dual purpose teaching/research infrastructure across a wide range of fields including Medical Research, Science and Engineering since 2008.
We're accumulating debt as a higher share of GDP and of course in absolute terms, (it's) absolutely astronomical …
A re-elected Gillard Labor Government in partnership with the NSW Government will build the Parramatta to Epping Rail Link, a clear missing link in Sydney’s rail network.
This is an important and affordable investment. We will deliver this commitment consistent with our strict fiscal rules, which will see the budget returned to surplus in three years, three years early, and which will keep the budget in surplus over the medium term.
We planned and funded the Moorebank Intermodal Terminal, delivering major productivity gains to Sydney and taking 3,300 trucks off the road every day …
This asset recycling initiative is a fancy-sounding name for privatisation of state assets and a reduction of Commonwealth spending on infrastructure.
The fund is an emblem for this government's political cowardice and lack of vision both when it comes to actual investment and to probity standards. The term 'asset recycling' is a different way of saying privatisation: the sale of existing public assets that are owned by the Australian people.
Asset Recycling Process using the Victorian Transport Building Fund—
In developing 'asset recycling' concept, Victorian Labor has closely monitored the progress of a similar program undertaken by the State Government in NSW.
Victorian Labor believes this approach is a common sense way to get things done without taking on unsustainable levels of debt or compromising investment in other important areas like health and education.
That all words after “That” be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:
“the bill be withdrawn and redrafted so that it is renamed the Encouraging Privatisation Bill 2014 in order to better reflect:
(1) the true purpose of the bill; and
(2) that the bill aims to encourage state governments to sell off public assets as quickly as possible, in part to make up for the shortfall in Commonwealth funding to state governments arising out of the 2014 Federal Budget.”
The privatisation of essential government services is not about competition and efficiency; it is about the redistribution of wealth and control.
Privatisation has become the final resort of governments that need funds but are afraid to tax the wealthy and prevent tax evasion by big businesses. Instead, government assets are sold in a scramble for cash at the expense of ongoing dividends and government control of essential services. Struggling families and small businesses suffer most from the inevitable price rises that follow.
For example, experience in the United States, where public and private enterprises supplied electricity contemporaneously, has consistently shown that public enterprises can provide a reliable service at lower cost to ratepayers. Similarly, in Britain and France, municipal governments offer water services at cheaper rates than privately operated services.
… the state's retail electricity market was deregulated after household electricity bills soared almost 24 per cent.
Today, South Australians are burdened with among the highest electricity bills on earth, ranked only behind Germany and Denmark according to a 2012 report.
The average annual South Australian bill is now $2335, compared with $1960 in NSW and Victoria, figures from the Australian Energy Regulator (AER) showed …
Mirabel died a slow, drawn-out death as a passenger airport …
"We don't even know what sort of airport is going to be built."
"I question some of the numbers—how you make billions of dollars for investing in Badgerys …
Even if Badgerys Creek did better, McDonald said, and got about 2 per cent of Kingsford Smith’s 38 million passengers, that equated to only 760,000 passengers a year.
"You put up, say, $1.5bn for a runway and a basic terminal.
"It’s not going to be a very lucrative business."
When you corporatise—
an essential service – you give to that corporation, the right to tax you, at whatever level they feel like, for forever.
(2) Clause 18, page 18 (lines 5 and 6), omit "Minister who recommended the specification of the grant (see section 19)", substitute "Infrastructure Minister".
(3) Clause 19, page 18 (lines 7 to 16), omit the clause, substitute:
19 Recommendations about grants payments
(1) The Finance Minister must not make a direction under subsection 18(1) in relation to a grant for an infrastructure project unless the Infrastructure Minister has recommended that a direction be made.
(2) The Infrastructure Minister must not make a recommendation under subsection (1) in relation to a grant for an infrastructure project unless:
(a) Infrastructure Australia has:
(i) given the Minister an evaluation of the project (see subsection (3)); and
(i) advised that there are likely to be productivity gains from the project; and
(b) if the grant is for expenditure incurred under the National Partnership Agreement on Asset Recycling—the grant relates to a transaction approved by the Treasurer for the purposes of this paragraph.
(3) Infrastructure Australia's evaluation of an infrastructure project mentioned in subparagraph (2)(a)(i) must:
(a) contain a cost benefit analysis of the project, including an estimate of the productivity gains from the project; and
(b) set out any other matter that Infrastructure Australia considers relevant to the project.
(4) For the purposes of paragraph (2)(b), the Treasurer must, by legislative instrument, approve a transaction relating to the sale of all or part of a specified State-owned asset.
(6) Clause 25, page 21 (lines 4 to 7), omit the clause, substitute:
25 Recommendations about payments
(1) The Finance Minister must not make a direction under subsection 24(1) for the purposes of making infrastructure payments for an infrastructure project unless the Infrastructure Minister has recommended that a direction be made.
(2) The Infrastructure Minister must not make a recommendation under subsection (1) in relation to infrastructure payments for an infrastructure project unless:
(a) Infrastructure Australia has:
(i) given the Minister an evaluation of the project (see subsection (3)); and
(ii) advised that there are likely to be productivity gains from the project; and
(b) if the payments are for expenditure incurred under the National Partnership Agreement on Asset Recycling—the payments relate to a transaction approved by the Treasurer for the purposes of this paragraph.
(3) Infrastructure Australia's evaluation of an infrastructure project mentioned in subparagraph (2)(a)(i) must:
(a) contain a cost benefit analysis of the project, including an estimate of the productivity gains from the project; and
(b) set out any other matter that Infrastructure Australia considers relevant to the project.
(4) For the purposes of paragraph (2)(b), the Treasurer must, by legislative instrument, approve a transaction relating to the sale of all or part of a specified State-owned asset.
The overriding message of this draft report is the need for a comprehensive overhaul of processes in the assessment and development of public infrastructure projects.
Look, it is a bit too early to give a breakdown. It is still under development in regard to the Perth Freight Link.
The commonwealth has a propensity to make these announcements, as you well know, but the reality is that the Main Roads department and this government will be implementing and designing the Roe 8 extension, and at this stage we have not actually got design plans that are worthy of public scrutiny, as the director has stated.
Maybe that is a question you should be asking a commonwealth government representative.
So you are not in a position to provide any modelling to show that 65,000 heavy vehicles will be taken off Perth roads?
Not at this stage, and I think the director general has stated his reasoning really well.
Would it be helpful, then, for the commonwealth minister to stop making claims that cannot be backed up and that you do not have the evidence to support?
The simple answer in the context of the conversation would be yes!
The House divided. [13:16]
(The Deputy Speaker—Mr Vasta)
(1) Clause 18, page 17 (after line 23), at the end of subclause (1), add:
Note: See also section 21A.
(4) Page 19 (after line 24), at the end of Subdivision B, add:
21A Cost benefit analyses to be made public
If a direction is made under subsection 18(1) in relation to a grant for an infrastructure project, the Infrastructure Minister must:
(a) table in each House of the Parliament, within 14 sitting days of that House after the direction is made, a copy of the evaluation by Infrastructure Australia provided to the Minister under section 19; and
(b) within 14 days of the direction being made, ensure that the following information about the project is made available on the Infrastructure Department's website:
(i) a description of the project;
(ii) when the project is to start and is likely to be completed.
(5) Clause 24, page 20 (after line 26), at the end of subclause (1), add:
Note: See also section 28A.
(7) Page 22 (after line 28), at the end of Subdivision C, add:
28A Cost benefit analyses to be made public
If a direction is made under subsection 24(1) for the purposes of making infrastructure payments for an infrastructure project, the Infrastructure Minister must:
(a) table in each House of the Parliament, within 14 sitting days of that House after the direction is made, a copy of the evaluation by Infrastructure Australia provided to the Minister under section 25; and
(b) within 14 days of the direction being made, ensure that the following information about the project is made available on the Infrastructure Department's website:
(i) a description of the project;
(ii) when the project is to start and is likely to be completed.
The House divided. [13:27]
(The Deputy Speaker—Mr Vasta)
That standing order 43 be suspended until the conclusion of the debate on the Asset Recycling Fund Bill 2014 and the Asset Recycling Fund (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2014.
Asset Recycling Fund Bill 2014
That this bill be now read a third time.
Asset Recycling Fund (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2014
That this bill be now read a third time.
“Kids like us don’t walk in a straight line & although we try, we try so hard—we don’t always arrive at the destination posts at your designated times.”
For a quarter of a century, Landcare has made Australia a better place, yet the scale of the task ahead is significant.
… we all want to do the right thing, by our planet.
I regard myself as a conservationist.
We in the Labor Party do not rely on scaring people to obtain power …
We are about reducing taxes, not increasing taxes. We are about getting rid of taxes, not imposing new taxes.
That the House censures the Prime Minister:
(1) for repeatedly and deliberately misleading the Parliament and the Australian people by:
(a) claiming that the Prime Minister's Budget is an honest Budget;
(b) claiming that the Prime Minister has not broken any of the promises he clearly made to the Australian people before the election;
(c) promising there would be no new or increased taxes and then introducing a new GP tax and new petrol tax; and
(d) claiming that there are no cuts to schools, hospitals and pensions despite the Prime Minister's own Budget papers showing the Government is cutting $80 billion from schools and hospitals, and cutting pension indexation; and
(2) for his dishonest Budget which is hurting Australians.
That so much of the standing and sessional orders be suspended as would prevent the Honourable the Leader of the Opposition moving immediately—That the House censures the Prime Minister:
(1) for repeatedly and deliberately misleading the Parliament and the Australian people by:
(a) claiming that the Prime Minister's Budget is an honest Budget;
(b) claiming that the Prime Minister has not broken any of the promises he clearly made to the Australian people before the election;
(c) promising there would be no new or increased taxes and then introducing a new GP tax and new petrol tax; and
(d) claiming that there are no cuts to schools, hospitals and pensions despite the Prime Minister's own Budget papers showing the Government is cutting $80 billion from schools and hospitals, and cutting pension indexation; and
(2) for his dishonest Budget which is hurting Australians.
That the Member be no longer heard.
The House divided. [14:54]
(The Speaker—Hon. Bronwyn Bishop)
That the member be no longer heard.
The House divided. [14:58]
(The Speaker—Hon. Bronwyn Bishop)
The House divided. [15:00]
(The Speaker—Hon. Bronwyn Bishop)
Social Security Legislation Amendment (Increased Employment Participation) Bill 2014
The Government hurting rural and regional Australia with its new petrol tax and unfair budget.
Answers to leading questions under torture naturally tell us nothing about the beliefs of the accused; but they are good evidence for the beliefs of the accusers.
Labor plans 'country caucus' to tap regional voters alienated by budget
Federal move would ensure rural impact of every major policy is taken into account, believes Joel Fitzgibbon
Federal Labor is preparing to establish a “country caucus” that would meet separately before the main caucus and could use its numbers to ensure policy takes regional and rural Australia into account.
On Tuesday night the New South Wales Right faction endorsed the New South Wales farmer, firefighter and leading rural advocate, Vivien Thomson, in Labor's No 3 winnable spot in the Senate ticket for the next federal election.
Her endorsement, led by the NSW general secretary, Jamie Clements, was seen as part of the move to diversify Labor's appeal in rural Australia.
Joel Fitzgibbon, as agricultural spokesman and member for the regional seat of Hunter, is the architect of the country caucus idea.
He said while the rural group was a 'work in progress', he hoped it would eventually review the regional impact of every major piece of Labor policy and generate ideas to benefit the bush.
'We are currently looking at ways we might engage on rural and regional Australia more formally and better as a caucus', he told Guardian Australia.
We hope to get country members—
and like minds together to become a clearing house for policy; generating ideas and when necessary using our collective weight to ensure policy takes into account regional and rural Australians.
Fitzgibbon has just completed a drought tour and in an unusual move for Labor, he ran a 'matter of public importance' on the effect of the budget on rural and regional Australia.
Trade Support Loans Bill 2014
Whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House notes that the government has failed to:
(1) advise apprentices that they would be abolishing the Tools for Your Trade program, thus leaving Trade Support Loans as the only form of assistance for the purchase of tools;
(2) adequately explain in clear language the interest rates and full liability of these loans;
(3) offer adequate protection for school based apprentices aged under 18;
(4) offer fair and reasonable transition arrangements for current apprentices;
(5) put in place adequate privacy protections for the large volumes of information that will be acquired through the Trade Support Loans Program; and
(6) offer apprentices the option of lump sum payments in order to purchase expensive items.
For example, one concern is that young apprentices starting out could find themselves under pressure to access these loans in order to pay for costs of the apprenticeship that should be borne by their employers, or to forego wage increases because a loan is available to meet their costs. The potential for abuse and misuse of the scheme is real but there is no indication of what resources, if any, will be directed towards educating and supporting apprentices in such situations, given that existing support programs have been abolished.
Under clause 75 of the Bill, a person only has to take an oath or affirmation to protect information they receive from apprentices. There do not appear to be any repercussions for a breach of these provisions or for failing to adhere to an oath or affirmation. By contrast, under the Higher Education Support Act 2003 the person/officer dealing with personal information has more onerous obligations to meet and the penalty is two years’ jail.
That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:
"whilst not declining to give the Bill a second reading the House notes that the Government has failed to:
(1) advise apprentices that they would be abolishing the Tools for Your Trade program, thus leaving Trade Support Loans as the only form of assistance for the purchase of tools;
(2) adequately explain in clear language the interest rates and full liability of these loans;
(3) offer adequate protection for school based apprentices aged between 16-18;
(4) offer fair and reasonable transition arrangements for current apprentices;
(5) put in place adequate privacy protections for the large volumes of information that will be acquired through the Trade Support Loans Program; and
(6) has failed to offer apprentices the option of lump sum payments in order to purchase expensive items."
The commonwealth has decided—it is its decision—to cut its share of the funding; therefore, $25 million has gone. The Western Australian government will not replace that; that is a federal government decision.
The Australian Anglican Church has lost a rare and brave liberal voice with the sudden death of John McIntyre, the Bishop of Gippsland. Bishop McIntyre, 62, came to prominence in recent years for his public championing of gay clergy.
Under attack in 2012 for appointing a gay priest in a same-sex partnership to a Gippsland parish, he told his diocese's synod that he believed that "God has been and is at work in and through gay and lesbian people". Despite strident condemnation from the Diocese of Sydney and other conservative church commentators, he refused to back down. While other Anglican Church leaders privately support gay clergy, few are prepared to stand up for their beliefs in the face of attacks from those determined to uphold the traditionalist viewpoint.
Although this controversy shone the spotlight on Bishop McIntyre, those who had experienced his ministry as a parish priest and then as bishop over 37 years already knew him as a strong progressive voice for good in many areas. These included not just his acceptance of gay people, but his work with the disadvantaged and marginalised, with Aboriginal people and his support for the full ministry of women in the church.
John Charles McIntyre - always known affectionately as "John Mac" or "Johnny Mac", even as a bishop - was born in Sydney in 1951, the youngest of three children of Ken (later ordained as an Anglican priest) and Vicky McIntyre. His uncle, Laurie McIntyre—
is also an Anglican priest, now retired.
John moved with his family to Melbourne when he was a teenager and attended Brighton Grammar School, before studying for the priesthood at Ridley College, Melbourne—
During that time he married Jan Clode; they would have three children - Jessica, Paul and Lisa.
After ordination, John served in several Melbourne parishes and lectured in theological subjects at Ridley College before moving to Sydney in 1990 to take up the role that defined his ministry. John was Rector of St Saviour's Church, Redfern - a parish with a tiny congregation that no one else wanted - for 15 years. He quickly became a highly respected and loved leader in a diverse community marked by disadvantage and need.
Known as "the Rev" at the Redfern pub, he made the parish the centre of a variety of community activities, so much so that in 1997 he was named Citizen of the Year by South Sydney Council. He was involved in WorkVentures, an organisation working with people at risk of social and economic exclusion, aiming to improve their employability.
Under his leadership a Koori congregation continue to be nurtured with an Aboriginal pastor, and he became involved in land rights debates and in public demonstrations in support of residents of The Block, the Redfern residential area home to generations of disadvantaged Aboriginal people.
He returned to Victoria in 2006 when he was elected Bishop of Gippsland. Preaching at his consecration as a bishop in St Paul's Cathedral, Melbourne, his friend the Reverend Dr Bill Lawton—
another great defender of the marginalised, described Bishop McIntyre "as a man whose heart lay with the alien and the outsider". John and Jan "lived" an acceptance of others, he said, reaching out to alienated people and helping them find community. "They are passionate about the needs of dispossessed people," he said.
These priorities did not change in his promotion to the episcopate … The same passion for the dispossessed and the marginalised, and the same strong advocacy on their behalf, marked his all-too-short time in Gippsland.
Just three weeks before he died, Bishop McIntyre—seemingly recovering from his illness—delivered what would be his final presidential address to his diocese's annual synod. It is vintage McIntyre—a clarion call to the church to "be present in community with an integrity of being that assures all those whose lives we touch that we are there alone for their wellbeing; that we are constantly and consistently committed to peace with justice, mercy and inclusion".
Further, his address called on the Australian government and community to offer compassion and justice to asylum seekers, to act responsibly to the threat of climate change and to reject—
Since his death, heartfelt tributes have flowed across social media from his many friends, and even from some who had condemned his support for the gay clergy. The tribute from Pastor Ray Minniecon, the CEO of the Kinchela Boys Home Aboriginal Corporation, is one of the most moving.
"John Mac," he said, "had this incredible ability to blend into the social fabric of our local community without being 'seen' as a priest or a 'do-gooder'. He knew how to feel the pulse, the pain, the suffering as well as the strength and resilience of our local people and community. He became 'one' with the people and their struggles rather than someone who 'had all the answers' and told you what you needed to know and do."
John Mac, he said, "knew how to put his faith into overalls".
… a great local community project, driven by great volunteers, with the support of a Work for the Dole team, …
I am a local resident urging you to take up the fight against the federal government's recent budget. We are a family of five on $65,000 gross.
We are struggling already to meet our expenses of just basic living. We don't smoke or drink, we don't go away on holidays and we buy our clothes second hand.
We don't spoil our kids with the latest technology and we struggle with one old computer to just do my son's homework and pay bills online.
We do not live beyond our means as the treasurer Joe Hockey seems to imply.
We rarely have take-away food, as it is too expensive ... In the holidays we have gone to the drive-in for a movie as we can get $25 a car load and share that with another family as we have a van.
It is insulting to have someone whose income is way above ours to say that we all need to feel the pain and get the debt down. We do not have a disposable income to speak of, we are just struggling to get by month to month.
As with the co-payment fee for GPs, of course I will take my boys to the doctor if they are unwell. However for myself and my husband we will probably wait until we can afford it.
This budget is divisive ... I feel that this budget has a great effect on those already struggling to live within their means. Yes we need to get the deficit down, just like we are paying our home loan down, but we don't take food off the table to put extra on the home loan, surely there is a better way.
The DEPUTY SPEAKER ( Hon. BC Scott ) took the chair at 09:30.
For over 15 years, the Genoa town committee and Genoa Hall committee have made continued representations to VicRoads regarding the condition of the Princes Highway adjacent to Genoa community hall at Scrubby Creek. This small community is sick and tired of being fobbed off by continual bureaucratic nonsense by VicRoads as accidents continue to happen.
Appropriation Bill (No. 1) 2014-2015
In this Budget the Government is adopting sensible indexation arrangements for schools from 2018, and hospitals from 2017-18, and removing funding guarantees for public hospitals. These measures will achieve cumulative savings of over $80 billion by 2024‑25.
The repeal of the LISC—
will be particularly damaging to the retirement savings of women who constitute an estimated two-thirds of those eligible. Staggeringly, the abolition of the LISC will negatively impact on the retirement savings of almost one in two women.
… to ensure a whole-of-government approach is given to providing better economic and social outcomes for women.
The Australian Government is working to improve women's economic empowerment.
… … …
Women's economic empowerment is central to a strong economy and region. For example, closing the workforce participation gap between women and men could boost gross domestic product by up to 13%.
For all the budget measures, the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet provides advice, and, since the Office for Women is located within the department, the Office for Women has provided advice on relevant measures leading up to the budget, which could include consulting with other agencies and providing internal advice that would feed into the whole-of-department advice on budget measures.
We did some modelling on repair and maintenance of housing and there's no doubt from the modelling that we got back that you can save 24 per cent … on the repair and maintenance of housing, and you can save from 5, 10 per cent in other areas.
We are the Traditional Owners of the Manuwangku/Warlmanpa Land Trust who do not want the nuclear waste dump.We are the nguramala from the land. The people from the land.
… … …
You are a new parliament for Australia. We are asking that you give us a new start as Aboriginal people who are being threatened with this nuclear waste dump.
There is a bill that will soon come before this parliament, the National Radioactive Waste Management Bill. It will target our land for the waste dump.
We are the Aboriginal people who own the land and the dreamings you are talking about. We are asking that you reject this bill and scrap Muckaty as a site for the waste dump.
The last two governments didn't listen to us—you must be different. We have been fighting for the last five years to say we don't want the waste dump in the land.
We are again inviting Minister Martin Ferguson and all members of the new parliament to come down and face us in our own country. Come and sit with us and hear the stories from the land.
My grandmother gave me that land in perfect condition, and other lands to my two brothers, who are now deceased. It was our duty to protect that land and water because it was a gift from my grandmother to me.
A LARGE donation originally “secured” by pressure group GetUp to fund its campaigns for last year’s federal election was provided to green group Friends of the Earth, meaning that the funds could be treated as a tax deduction.
We are a peaceful group but we are willing to break the law because it's so important to ensure that we get action on climate change.
We will be keeping the Renewable Energy Target. We have made that commitment. We have no plans or proposals to change it. We have no plans or intentions for change and we have offered bipartisan support to that, and we will maintain bipartisan support towards the 20 per cent target.
We will maintain bipartisan support towards the 20 per cent target.
We agree on the national targets to reduce our emissions by five per cent by 2020. We also agree on the Renewable Energy Target and one of the things we do not want to do is to become a party where there's this wild sovereign risk where businesses take steps to their detriment on the basis of a pledge and a policy of government, and we are very clear that that is not where we want to be.
What is the cost of the East West Link project?
The entire East West Link project is estimated to cost between $14 billion and $18 billion.
(1) How many motorists are expected to use Melbourne's East-West Link per day when it is opened, and what level of petrol price is this estimate based on.
(2) Is it anticipated that the number of motorists using the East-West Link per day will change if the price of petrol rises; if so, by what number.
(1) Transport modelling indicates that by 2031, 100,000 to 120,000 vehicles will travel along the Eastern section of the East West Link using the three lane twin tunnels (detailed transport modelling is yet to be undertaken for the Western section). There are many inputs into the transport model and forward petrol price projecting is one such input.
(2) The transport model is sensitive to many different inputs including population growth, network improvements elsewhere on the Melbourne network, car occupancy, public transport fares and vehicle operating costs, including the price of petrol. Sensitivity tests are undertaken with different values for particular parameters to understand the impact on travel demand. The published forecast takes account of the various considered scenarios.
Is it a fact that construction of the East West Link will result in the loss of 5000 trees; if not, how many trees will be lost?
At this time, the final design for East West Link is unknown and therefore the precise impact on trees is unknown. The contractor selected to construct the project is required to comply with the project's Environmental Management Framework which not only requires park land to be restored after the project is complete but to also achieve a net increase in tree canopy.