Tag Archives: media release

Regional Understanding, From The MP For Marrickville

25 Mar

Media Release – Senator Barnaby Joyce, 25 March 2013:

Labor ignores regional Australia again

Ms Gillard has decided that the best place to understand regional Australia is from Marrickville.

Anthony Albanese hasn’t got the conviction to stand by his ally Rudd but seemingly will have the conviction to look after the interests of regional Australia. He has gained a very good grasp of it apparently from his electorate office located at 334A Marrickville Road, Marrickville.

Obviously the Member for Page, Capricornia or Lingiari are not competent enough in the Ministry. It is saying something when you get a Minister for Regional Australia from Marrickville.

When you look at it from our point of view in regional Australia, imagine if we had the Minister for Urban Issues with his electorate office in Quilpie. It is a slap in the face of what the term regional means and nobody in regional areas can take this portfolio under Gillard seriously any more.

Five Coalition Shadow Cabinet Ministers are based in regional Australia as opposed to none from Labor. How can this government possibly represent regional Australia when they do not have a single minister based in a regional area?

Mr Albanese held the Regional Development and Local Government ministries from 2007 to 2010 and did nothing to improve the lives of rural and regional Australians.

He managed to strip $1 billion out of regional programmes in the first budget alone and $500 million from the Regional Partnerships and Growing Regions programmes.

Area Consultative Committees were abolished and along with it 500 voluntary committee positions and 150 jobs. After breaking his promise of retaining these programs Mr Albanese even refused to fund projects already approved for funding by the former Government.

Based on Mr Albanese’s track record in Regional Development, why did Prime Minister Gillard reward him with these portfolios? It just proves that Regional Australia is nothing but an afterthought for Ms Gillard and the Labor Party.

Advertisements

Chaos Stood And Was Re-elected Unanimously: Barnaby

22 Mar

Media Release, Senator Barnaby Joyce, 22 March 2013:

Regional Development and Local Government left unrepresented

Yesterday the Labor party caucus called a ballot. Chaos stood and was re-elected unanimously.

Former Labor party leader, Simon Findlay Crean, Member for Hotham, said things had to come to a head and instead he lost his.

The problem we have now is that I am Shadow to a person that does not exist. There is no Minister for Regional Development. And this toxic amalgam of Green, Labor party and Independents, far from looking after regional areas, has left them completely and utterly disenfranchised.

The person who said he was going to drive through constitutional recognition of local government is now gone. The Labor party has sat on the Spigelman review, which recommended a referendum on constitutional recognition of local government at the 2013 election, for over a year. Now less than six months from an election we have no response, no legislation and no Minister.

Is this the sort of stability that the Member for New England, Mr Windsor, and the Member for Lyne, Mr Oakeshott, was requesting when they decided to support the Green-Labor-Independent government?

Who is now representing Regional Australia? Who is now representing Local Government? For that matter, who is now running the country? Who is preparing the budget?

It has taken me exactly ten minutes after walking down the street this morning to find out what the Australian people think of all this. They are appalled, they want it all to be resolved and soon.

God Spare Us From The Government’s “Modellers”

16 Apr

Media Release – Senator Barnaby Joyce, 16 April 2012:

Dodgy modelling on Murray-Darling plan means consultation falls short

New economic modelling on the Murray-Darling Basin plan shows that the government has failed to consider the economic and social impacts of its draft basin plan. The government must immediately commission new economic research which covers the entire Murray-Darling Basin.

The modelling by Chris Murphy, of Independent Economics, shows that the draft basin plan could lead to the loss of 2100 jobs and a 9 per cent reduction in economic activity in just five towns around Griffith.*

“Chris Murphy is one of Australia’s leading economic modellers. His work shows that the economic impact of the draft could be up to 10 times worse than what the government has admitted to date” said Senator Joyce today.

“The government’s economic modelling of the Basin Plan is a complete farce. It assumes that no irrigator will leave the region after water is bought back from a community. The reality is that Bilbo Baggins gets his cheque and retires to the Gold Coast. I raised this issue with the government almost two years ago in Senate estimates and they have completely ignored it.**

Chris Murphy’s model allows people to move away from irrigation and he shows convincingly that this reason alone makes the difference between his results and the governments.

“With work this dodgy it’s no wonder Tony Burke has yet to get the support of one State Government for the Draft Basin Plan.

“The government can’t reject the findings of this modelling because it has been partly funded by the government through its Strengthening Basin Communities program and Regional Development Australia funding. Unfortunately the funding has only been able to pay for modelling in one of the 21 catchments in the Basin.

“The government must immediately fund more economic modelling for the entirety of the Basin. Without it there can be no guarantee that we will deliver a triple-bottom line outcome.”

* http://www.independenteconomics.com.au/Latest.aspx

** Senator JOYCE—If it is a general equilibrium model, my understanding would be, for example: say I buy a place in Leeton—a town that you did not visit—and the money just goes to everybody in the town, not to the person you actually bought the licence from.

Mr Gooday—You are getting at the way in which we distributed the proceeds of the sale of the licences back into the regional economies. The way we modelled it is what you described. For a region that sold, say, $10 million worth of water entitlements, the modelling was done by putting $10 million back into the region by spreading it across each industry. We recognise in the report that that is probably not the ideal way to do it, but the general equilibrium model does not distinguish between farm households and irrigation households. So we were not able to do it the other way.

Senator JOYCE—It is not even vaguely close to what happens. What happens with the general equilibrium model is: Bilbo Baggins gets $5 million for his water licence and he goes and retires on the coast. He does not go back into town and buy battered savs off the local servo.

Mr Gooday—Yes. And we understand that. I think the real point here is the level at which the general equilibrium model is constructed. It really does not matter how we give the money back. It does not make any great difference to the results, because the regions are rather large, and each of these seven regions contains—

Senator JOYCE—This really brings us to the issue. Given the limitations of this study which we have just spelt out—and that has been in 10 or 15 minutes—in your view, does the study’s conclusion support the minister’s view that the report, and I quote:

… confirms that the Rudd Government’s long-term Water for the Future plan is supporting the future viability of our Basin communities and returning the rivers to health …

Senator NASH—That is hilarious.

Mr Gooday—The report says what the report says.

http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate_Committees?url=@Hansard/S13017.pdf

16 April 2012

“WindsorWorld” … Is That Like Wayne’s World?

30 Mar

Media Release – Senator Barnaby Joyce, 30 March 2012:

Queensland election a message to Independents as well

Seven independent members of parliament have been voted out of office since Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott decided to back a Green-Labor government.

Tony Windsor’s claim that “independents actually performed quite well at the [Queensland] election” is a denial of reality.

On average Independent members suffered a bigger swing against them than the Labor party at the Queensland election. There were five seats in which independents were sitting members at the Queensland 2012 election.

Across those five seats, independent candidates suffered an average swing against them of 18 per cent, a more devastating swing than meted out to the Labor party.

In WindsorWorld apparently this is a great outcome. Windsor has an amazing analysis of history, it changes 5 minutes after the fact. The reality is the Independents got absolutely nailed.

People are just sick of this idea that you can sneak around and tell people that you are really part of both football teams when you are in fact part of neither.

Only two out of five independent Queensland electorates look to have retained their seats. This compares to three out of six independent members at the 2011 New South Wales election retaining their seats, an election that was widely seen as a disaster for independent members.

In total, since Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott revealed that they were actually closet Green/Labor supporters, 7 independent members have been voted out of Parliament and only 5 re-elected in the Victorian, New South Wales and Queensland elections.

Faked GDP, Faked Budgets, Faked Legal Advice – Nothing To See Here

28 Mar

Media Release – Senator Barnaby Joyce, 28 March 2012 (my emphasis added):

Government response keeps Murray-Darling in the dark on the Water Act

The Labor government has once again refused to release legal advice on the Water Act in defiance of the recommendations of a Senate inquiry.

Last year, the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee found that the provisions of the Water Act create a legal framework where “environmental considerations can be, and are, given substantially more ‘weight’ than social and economic considerations.”

Even the Greens, in their dissenting report, admitted the same stating that “the MDBA and the Minister are required to give environmental considerations precedence in developing the Basin Plan.”

The difference is that the Greens agree with this unbalanced outcome, the Committee recommended the Act be changed to fix it and that all of the government’s legal advice be released.

The Committee’s recommendations were based on legal advice from many sources including an ‘in camera’ briefing from former MDBA chair, Mike Taylor, submissions from Professor George Williams, Professor of Law at the University of New South Wales, and Professor John Briscoe of Harvard University.

The government’s response to the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee’s Water Act inquiry has also called into question the validity of the summary legal advice the government has previously released.

So far the government has released just 10 pages of the more than 1000 pages of legal advice they have received on the Water Act.

In its response today, the government claims that the summary legal advice it has made public is “distinguished” from other legal advice because it was prepared on the understanding that it would be made public.

This calls into question whether the summary advice is a full and accurate reflection of the other advice the government has received.

The Murray-Darling is too important for the government to keep it in the dark. It must release all of the legal advice before the basin plan is finalised.

The Murray-Darling is home to 2.1 million Australians, provides water for 1 million others and produces 40 per cent of Australia’s agricultural output, including 9 of every 10 Australian oranges.

Over the past two years, we have seen that the Rudd-Gillard-Swan ALP government has faked GDP, and faked budgets, by becoming adept in the “dark arts” and “using some of what are now  the standard tricks in order to (in the words of former Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner) “maximise political appearances”.

Now, thanks to Senator Joyce, we see that they will happily fake legal advice as well.

Funnily enough, the ALP and the Greens have recently expressed “confidence” that their carbon tax CO2 derivatives scam legislation is legally sound, and does not breach the Constitution.

Hmmmm.

Wouldn’t it be interesting to see their actual legal advice.

You know.

The advice they have not released to the public.

What would be even more interesting is to see their legislation challenged in the High Court.

For that, it seems our fate is in the hands of big-promising-non-delivering Coalition State Governments.

And National Living Treasure, Clive Palmer.

More Deceit From ACF Eco Warriors

22 Mar

Media Release – Senator Barnaby Joyce, 22 March 2012:

Misleading in the Murray-Darling

The Australian Conservation Foundation today has put out incomplete analysis on the impact of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan on house prices in the Murray-Darling.

The ACF have released data from 2006 to 2010 even though this whole process only started going pear shaped when the Labor government released the flawed Guide to the Murray-Darling in late 2010.

In essence, the problem starts where their assessment finishes.

The Age reported earlier this year that house prices in 14 irrigation towns had experienced average falls in house prices of 4.2 per cent since the Guide was released. This is a much more relevant and up to date dataset.

The ACF even try to claim that the house price falls in the Basin are not that bad because house prices have fallen by more in Brisbane over the past year. I am not sure if they have turned on a TV for a while but the city’s biggest flood in 30 years may just have had something to do with that.

House prices should naturally increase with the development of an irrigation economy over time. People buy houses with money not with frogs.

Likewise, when you start closing parts of an economy, and take that money away, house prices will fall.

It is so infuriating to people who live in irrigation towns when others suggest that shutting down agricultural production won’t have a negative economic impact. That is like saying taking the finance industry away from Sydney won’t impact its economy or that if you stop eating you will stay the same weight.

Barnaby: Greens All About Politics On CSG

16 Mar

Media release – Senator Barnaby Joyce, 15 March 2012:

Greens party CSG inquiry about politics not action

The Greens party’s attempt to instigate another inquiry into coal seam gas is politically motivated and counterproductive. Another inquiry will simply delay the changes that are needed to deliver better outcomes for the environment and for landholders.

The Nationals were responsible for the instigation of the Senate inquiry into coal seam gas which reported in November last year. That report made comprehensive recommendations on establishing a national regulatory framework including cumulative and regional modelling, the regulation of chemicals, water licences, trust funds for make good expenses, prime agricultural land and access arrangements.

The Nationals also called for at least 1 per cent of the gross revenue from coal seam gas go towards providing a return to landowners.

The government has not responded to that inquiry. At this point in time having a further inquiry, to look into what has already been covered, is not of any assistance.

The inquiry seems to be more of a political advertising campaign for the Greens party than a genuine attempt to be part of the resolution.

The Nationals have been very clear about what needs to be resolved. Prime agricultural land must be protected, aquifers cannot be destroyed, the quiet enjoyment of residential areas must be respected and a fair return must go back to the landholders on whose land the drilling takes place.

What will a further inquiry achieve beyond delaying action on these issues? In essence, it would dilute the potency of the recommendations made last year because clearly the Greens party does not think that this inquiry was good enough and we need another one.

The Nationals don’t resile from future inquiries if they are needed but the Greens seem to want another one just because they were not responsible for the first Senate inquiry into this issue.

%d bloggers like this: