RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS - Queensland Parliament ...

2308 Appropriation (Parliament) Bill; Appropriation Bill 31 Oct 2012
latter that I always have two teaspoons of sugar in my coffee—one for Farleigh and one for Prossie. I
have said this a couple of times. It is a little cheeky perhaps, given that Proserpine Mill is actually owned
by Sucrogen and not Mackay Sugar.
Mr Cripps: Ha, ha!
Mr COSTIGAN: Putting those rivalries aside—and I take the humour being displayed by the
member for Hinchinbrook, who is one of the aforementioned ministers—this $4.6 million package is
good news for sugar and good news for communities such as Mackay and the Whitsundays, given that
our communities would not be where they are today without sugar. Furthermore, this package will go
some way to fulfilling the government’s commitment to doubling agricultural food production by 2040.
As government members would know—in fact, they are probably saying it in their sleep by now—
it is part of our four-pillar approach to fixing the Queensland economy after that terrible damage inflicted
by two decades of Labor. I might point out that this $4.6 million in extra funding for R&D will eventually
flow on to Sugar Research Australia, that new entity that is being put together after growers and millers
voted overwhelmingly to get with the times and have one single body. I think the ministers handled
themselves superbly during the estimates process and we are well and truly getting sugar back on the
map.
(Time expired)
Mr COX (Thuringowa—LNP) (8.25 pm): As a new member of the House in the 54th Parliament, I
found the process of the estimate hearings as part of the Agriculture, Resources and Environment
Committee a responsibility that was taken very seriously by most participants in AREC’s hearings, with
the exception of some of those opposite. The member for Bundamba was up to her usual antics, which
I found inappropriate in such a forum. The member wasted valuable time that could have been better
used on committee business, not her song and dance routine. Likewise, the member for South Brisbane
persisted in asking questions to the wrong minister who was obviously absent. The member for South
Brisbane has included in her statement of reservations her ‘concerns regarding the conduct of the
estimates hearings’. Member for South Brisbane, it was disappointing that you and your comrades did
not consider these ‘reservations’ regarding your own conduct. You stated—
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER (Mr Ruthenberg): Order! Member for Thuringowa, please address your
comments through the chair.
Mr COX: The member stated—
When the wholesale and bipartisan changes to the committee system were introduced last year there was widespread optimism
that they would improve government accountability and increase proper scrutiny.
The current LNP government is maintaining that accountability by ensuring that the number of
government and non-government members in each committee is actually in favour of non-government
representation based on the make-up of the 54th Parliament. I remind those in opposition that the
people of Queensland gave us a mandate for change and this budget is part of the process to get our
state back in the black. Increasing ‘proper scrutiny’, as you put it, was not part of the bipartisan changes
Labor agreed to or you would have spent more time asking questions to the correct minister at the
appropriate time. You were concerned the process was—
... overly weighted towards Government questions when compared to equivalent estimates hearings during the term of the
previous Government.
Again, I put to the member for South Brisbane that these are two very different governments in
terms of numbers on both sides of this chamber. Considering those ratios, the opposition members are
more than fairly represented on the committee. Perhaps the reason the member for South Brisbane is
complaining that she did not get enough time for questions is that the committee gave leave to other
members, including the Leader of the Opposition and the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, who rank
higher in her party, to participate in the hearing. Maybe that is what is frustrating the member for South
Brisbane. I use my time representing my constituents, not climbing the party ladder. The people of
Thuringowa expect no less.
I also see that the member for Dalrymple made a comment in his ‘Statements of Reservation’
about the hearings. He said—
... while fitting the Government’s agenda of cutting costs, indicated that there has been very little consideration of the broader
economic and social costs of these decisions to rural communities.
He then went on to state—
I disagree fundamentally with the Government’s approach to the budget.
The member for Dalrymple apparently does not understand the fundamentals of good
government and must be confused with the model provided by his new partners as the representatives
for the north-west Labor block. If we are to correct the ‘broader economic and social costs’ imposed by
the opposition when they ran this state into the ground, it is this once-in-a-generation budget that will
return us to the fundamentals of good government—that is, to balance the books. We have done this by
ensuring those front-line services for the deserving people of Queensland and Thuringowa are still
provided, including to those in regional and rural communities.