Andrew Leigh

My Chronicle column this week is on innovation.

Capital still an ideas leader, The Chronicle, 1 April 2014

Ask a non-Canberran what words they associate with ‘Canberra’, and it’s likely they’ll come back with ‘politics’ or ‘government’. Yet as those of us who live here know, ours is a city that’s considerably more than the seat of government. If I had to devise a single notion that sums up smart bureaucrats, connected academics and innovative start-ups, it would be that Canberra is an ‘ideas city’.

Recently, I had the pleasure of launching a new book by Peter Dawson, titled Creative Capital. It tells the tale of a city that is informed, modest and connected. Peter Dawson discusses the Australian National University’s role in dating rocks from Apollo 11, Vikram Sharma’s work on quantum cryptography and Alex Zelinsky’s machines that prevent drivers from falling asleep. He reminds us of about Chris Parish’s cancer research, Peter Gage’s HIV research, Charmaine Simeonovic’s work on diabetes and Tim Hirst’s breakthroughs on influenza. And he describes Canberra scientists who’ve delivered environmental breakthroughs: Andrew Blakers on solar photovoltaic cells; Stephen Kaneff, Peter Carden and others on concentrating solar.

The typical Canberran might well know about CSIRO’s success in developing wi-fi, a bestselling diet book, printable solar cells and a vaccine for the Hendra virus. But Peter Dawson goes beyond this to tell the stories of commercial entrepreneurs Adrian Faccioni, who developed GPS devices for sportspeople; and Glenn Keys, who created a medical practice that helped save the life of former Timorese President José Ramos-Horta. He describes Scott Rashleigh’s development of optical fibre, Ben Greene’s work on tracking space junk, and Marcus Daw’s work on carbon capture. In the military arena, he tells the stories of Peter Moran (wearable computers), David Gaul and Ian Croser (radar) and Canberra firm X-Tek (body armour).

Peter Dawson’s book made me proud to be a Canberran. But it isn’t just a puff-piece for the city. The book also raises the question of how policymakers should seek to foster innovation. There are valuable lessons in Peter Dawson’s accounts of the early days the Australian National University: for example the focus on personnel over architectural blueprints. And as the stories of Howard Florey, H.C. Coombs, W.K. Hancock and Mark Oliphant illustrate, Canberra’s universities – at their best – can perfect the balance between theory and practice; between policy work and pure research.

Improving the linkages between universities and business is a tough nut to crack. To the credit of the Gallagher Government, it has trialled a variety of solutions to boost entrepreneurship, including the newly formed innovation space Entry 29. Like a good private sector start-up company, it’s wise for governments not to think they have all the answers. Experiment, experiment, experiment.

Peter Dawson – and his wife Liz – are immersed in Canberra’s social and intellectual life. They know as much as anyone that while Canberra isn’t perfect, we’re lucky to live here. And as Creative Capital teaches us, Canberra has produced not just clever bureaucrats, but innovative boffins and creative businesspeople too.

Andrew Leigh is the Federal Member for Fraser. Creative Capital is available from Halstead Press, www.halsteadpress.com.au.

As the Treasurer receives the final report of the Commission of Audit - a document set to guide the drafting of the Abbott Government's first budget - I spoke this morning to the ABC's Marius Benson about secrecy surrounding cuts expected in the upcoming May budget. Listen to the NewsRadio podcast here.

NewsRadio 31-3-14

Addressing the National Press Club, I talked about a generation of rising inequality, how the Abbott Government's policies will affect inequality and the importance of maintaining Australia's egalitarian ethos (download audio; iTunes podcast):

ANDREW LEIGH MP
SHADOW ASSISTANT TREASURER
SHADOW MINISTER FOR COMPETITION
MEMBER FOR FRASER

Battlers and Billionaires: Australian Egalitarianism Under Threat*

National Press Club Address

THURSDAY, 27 MARCH 2014

CANBERRA


In 2002, two bombs exploded in Bali nightclubs, killing and injuring hundreds of people. At the local hospital, there was a shortage of painkillers. Graeme Southwick, an Australian doctor on duty, asked patients to assess their own pain levels. He kept being told by patients in the ‘Australian’ ward that they were okay – the person next to them was suffering more.

Coming across this account, historian John Hirst was reminded of the description of injured Australians in Gallipoli nearly a century earlier. He quotes the official war historian Charles Bean, who describes the suffering and then says, ‘Yet the men never showed better than in these difficulties. The lightly hurt were full of thought for the severely wounded.’

Even in the midst of their own pain, the first instinct of many Australians was to think of those worse off than themselves.

Even the military, one of our most hierarchical institutions, is infused with the nation’s egalitarian spirit. Indeed, it has been suggested that this is one reason why our forces are such effective peacekeepers. When the United Nations intervened in Somalia in the 1990s, our troops were more inclined to go on foot patrols than the French and American forces, who tended to stay in jeeps and behind sandbags.

As a result, our troops were more likely to listen to local townspeople rather than just hearing the views of tribal leaders. This in turn made them more effective at solving local disputes. It was, as one account put it, ‘an example of the traditional Australian sympathy for the underdog being put to very good use’.

Egalitarianism goes deep in the Australian character. Most of us don’t like tipping. I’d like to think that’s our egalitarianism at work. There aren’t private areas on our beaches. Audiences don’t stand when the prime minister enters the room. We’re a country that happily dispensed with knighthoods a generation ago, and no sensible person would suggest that the land of ‘mate’ should become the kingdom of ‘sir’.

In Australia, it’s quite normal to sit in the front seat of a taxi. If the plumber drops around, we’ll offer a cuppa. One of our billionaires is ‘Twiggy’ and past Australian Reserve Bank governors include ‘Nugget’ and ‘Nobby’.

Egalitarianism is as much a part of Australia’s national identity as vegemite, Uluru and the Big Banana.

And yet that egalitarian ethos is increasingly under threat from a rise in inequality over the past generation.

Let me give you a few numbers.

Read more

I spoke in Parliament today to celebrate the arrival of the Bruce GP Super Clinic, and to ask what it is about efficient, affordable and accessible healthcare that the Government thinks is ‘nasty’?:

This week saw the opening of the GP Super Clinic in Bruce. Residents in Canberra's north now have better access to general practitioners, nurses, pathologists, dieticians, counsellors and a range of other allied health practitioners. The facility is located on the grounds of the University of Canberra, which means it can integrate teaching, training and research. There are already eight GPs treating patients in the new clinic in Bruce, and there is capacity to expand to 18 doctors and related supporting services.

The super clinic will help to meet the expected demand coming from the growth in Canberra's northern suburbs. It will provide improved access for northsiders to vital health services. I celebrated the opening of the clinic; I helped turn the first sod last year with former health minister, Tanya Plibersek, who is a passionate supporter of GP super clinics, unlike the current health minister.

Read more

Federal Labor will support the triple indexation of military superannuation pensions. Here’s the media release issued today by the Shadow Minister for Veterans’ Affairs, Don Farrell:

SENATOR DON FARRELL

SHADOW MINISTER FOR VETERANS’ AFFAIRS
SHADOW MINISTER FOR THE CENTENARY OF ANZAC
SENATOR FOR SOUTH AUSTRALIA



MEDIA RELEASE



LABOR SUPPORTS TRIPLE INDEXATION OF MILITARY SUPERANNUATION PENSIONS BILL

The Opposition will support the Defence Force Retirement Benefits Legislation Amendment (Fair Indexation) Bill 2014 which allows the “triple indexing” of the Defence Forces Retirement Benefits (DFRB) and the Defence Force Retirement and Death Benefits (DFRDB) military superannuation pensions for those aged over 55.

Shadow Minister for Veterans’ Affairs Senator Don Farrell said an estimated 57,000 retired military personnel will receive a $160 million boost to their pensions from July 1 this year if this legislation passes with the support of Labor.

“As a nation, we are rightly proud of our ex-servicemen and women who have helped protect our nation and its interests,” said Senator Farrell.

“We will support this Bill which ensures DFRB and DFRDB military superannuation pensions are indexed in the same way as aged and service pensions for those aged 55 and over.”

Senator Farrell said Labor had a proud legacy of looking after veterans.

“In the last Budget, we committed a record $12.5 billion to veterans including mental health programs and greater support for veterans and their families,” he said.

“We worked hard to make steady and sustainable improvements to veteran’s pensions and support, even in the face of the enormous challenge posed by the Global Financial Crisis.

“It’s utterly shameful this Government still plans to cut payments to the children and orphans of war veterans who have been killed or injured.

“Coalition MPs and Senators should be standing up to the Prime Minister on behalf for the children of war veterans, not voting to cut their payments.”

Senator Farrell called on the Abbott Government to outline in detail the impact of the legislation on the Future fund and the unfunded liability.

“The Government must explain how it intends to manage the issues associated with the Future Fund and the issues which will emerge in the years ahead.”

WEDNESDAY, 26 MARCH 2014

Crowning glory would be our own head of state, Canberra Times, 26 March 2014

Walter Scott once wrote: ‘Breathes there a man with soul so dead / Who never to himself hath said / This is my own, my native land.’

Alas, these fine words have never been uttered by any Australian head of state about Australia. Under our Constitution, they never could be uttered.

That is because - while no British citizen can ever be Australia’s head of government - only a British citizen can ever be Australia’s head of state.

In 1999, Australia held a referendum. It was a three-cornered contest between bipartisan parliamentary appointment Republicans, direct election Republicans and Monarchists.

As Malcolm Turnbull has pointed out, the monarchists ‘delightedly, if cynically, exploited the division by promising the direct electionists that if the parliamentary model was defeated at a referendum they could have another referendum on a direct election model within a few years’.

We have waited half a generation since then.

Some counsel patience. They argue that the push for an Australian as head of state should wait until King Charles III ascends the throne.

This fundamentally misunderstands the argument for an Australian Republic. Republicans’ quibble is not with Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Charles and their heirs and successors. Each of these individuals has done their jobs diligently.

Indeed, a belief in the Republic does not lessen our respect for them as individuals. In 2012, when Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall visited Canberra, I was pleased to welcome them on the tarmac of Canberra airport (wearing my Australian Republican Movement cufflinks). Respect and politeness for the royal family sits alongside my passionate belief that Australia should have one of our own as head of state.

Last year, Prince William and Kate Middleton welcomed their baby George into the world, and today, at least 800 babies will be born in Australia. I congratulate William, Kate and all their parents. To be a parent is one of the greatest blessings we can receive.

But I cannot for the life of me see why Baby George is better suited than every Australian baby to grow up to be an Australian head of state. The 800 children born in Australia will grow up around gumtrees and sandy beaches. They will call their friends ‘mate’ and barrack for the Baggy Greens, the Wallabies and the Socceroos. Their success in life will not be decided by their surname. If they say they live in a castle, it’ll be because they’re quoting Darryl Kerrigan.

In short, those 800 babies born today will be Australians.  And every one of them should be able to aspire to be our head of state.

Those who disagree with this view sometimes claim that the Governor-General is the head of state.  At best, a contentious, strained protestation. All members of the Australian Parliament swore or affirmed our allegiance to the Queen, not to the Governor-General.

At state dinners visiting Heads of State toast the Queen of Australia. Her image is on our currency. Australian Government websites say: ‘Australia’s head of state is Queen Elizabeth II.’

The slogan ‘Don’t know? Vote no’ has never been more powerful in Australian public life. Tony Abbott used it when he was campaigning for the monarchy in 1999, and has deployed it relentlessly in recent years, including against a market-based solution to climate change, fibre to the home broadband, and fiscal stimulus to save jobs.

It is a seductively simple line, but one that is more dangerous than ever as Australia grapples with complex challenges.

In the Asian Century, how do we think it looks to our Indonesian, Chinese, Korean and Japanese friends that we cannot shrug off the anachronism of having a member of the house of Windsor as our head of state? How does it sit with our claimed belief in the ‘fair go’ when the qualification to be our head of state is that one must be British, white and preferably male? Is this really the image we want to project?

In parliament this week, I moved a motion calling on the government to hold a referendum to make Australia a Republic.

In so doing, Australia would make it clear to ourselves and the world that instead of a foreign child in a foreign land, we trust an Australian child to grow up and be an Australian head of state. Such a child will be more appropriate for us, more representative of us and more worthy of us ­– a child who knows their own, native land in their living, Australian soul.

Andrew Leigh is the federal member for Fraser, and his website is www.andrewleigh.com.

This morning I issued a release congratulating Federal Labor's former Assistant Treasurer David Bradbury for his new strategic leadership role with the OECD.

ANDREW LEIGH MP

SHADOW ASSISTANT TREASURER

SHADOW MINISTER FOR COMPETITION

MEMBER FOR FRASER



MEDIA RELEASE



DAVID BRADBURY TO LEAD OECD TAX POLICY AND STATISTICS DIVISION

Shadow Assistant Treasurer, Andrew Leigh, has warmly congratulated former Assistant Treasurer David Bradbury on his appointment to a strategic role with the  Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

The OECD undertook a competitive and global selection process to choose Mr Bradbury as the new head of the Tax Policy and Statistics Division based in Paris.

From next month Mr Bradbury will be in charge of raising the profile of tax policy analysis work at the OECD.

“David has an international reputation for his strong leadership and understanding of the taxation of multinational enterprises. He and Wayne Swan led the Australian debate on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting and modernising Australia’s transfer pricing laws.”

Mr Bradbury, a former tax lawyer, was Assistant Treasurer under the previous Labor Government, with responsibilities in including taxation reforms. He was instrumental in establishing Australia’s first and vital national regulator of the not-for-profit sector.

“I congratulate David and wish him well in his new and important role,” added Dr Leigh.

TUESDAY 25 MARCH, 2014

CATHERINE KING MP

SHADOW MINISTER FOR HEALTH

MEMBER FOR BALLARAT



ANDREW LEIGH MP

MEMBER FOR FRASER



MEDIA RELEASE

MORE FRONTLINE HEALTH SERVICES BEING DELIVERED BY LABOR



Residents in Canberra’s north now have better access to general practitioners, nurses, pathologists, dieticians, counsellors and a range of other allied health practitioners after the opening of the GP Super Clinic in Bruce.

This facility partners with the University of Canberra and integrates teaching, training and research.

More than 3 million MBS items have been delivered through the GP Super Clinics program across Australia, and GP Super Clinics are providing better access to primary care and delivering healthcare, despite the lack of support for better primary care infrastructure by the Abbott government.

There are already nine GPs treating patients from the new clinic in Bruce with the capacity to expand to 18 doctors along with supporting services.  This will help meet the expected demand coming from the growth in Canberra’s northern suburbs into the future.

‘GP Super Clinics are providing better access to bulk-billing services as well as after-hours access to doctors across the country,’ said Shadow Minister for Health Catherine King.

‘This Super Clinic will also enhance the area’s medical training capacity through a partnership with the University of Canberra and provides access to pathology labs, radiology and pharmacy,’ Ms King said.

‘I have been a strong advocate for a Super Clinic on Canberra’s Northside, and was pleased to attend the sod-turning ceremony in February 2013 with former Health Minister Tanya Plibersek,’ said Member for Fraser, Dr Andrew Leigh.

‘The Liberals have never seen a GP Super Clinic they didn’t want to block. Without Labor’s commitment to better health care and better medical training, Canberrans would not be benefiting from this first-rate facility.’



The funding agreement for this GP Super Clinic was signed in May 2012, construction commenced in March last year and it is officially opening today, having commenced operations in February.

TUESDAY, 25 MARCH 2014

I spoke in parliament about the fact that the government has not yet told us what would replace the charities commission if it were abolished.

Australian Charities and Not-for-Profits Commission, 24 March 2014

Last week, the government announced that there would be a bonfire of legislation. What was in this great vanity of a bonfire? There were three things. There was the repeal of what Fred Hilmer, the father of competition policy, called ‘ghost acts’. These are acts such as the act to repeal another act which could themselves be safely repealed because they were not troubling anyone. Then there was the repeal of protections for consumers of financial advice, which, thankfully, has been placed on pause. As the members for McMahon and Oxley have pointed out today, the coalition's FoFA changes achieved the unique configuration of being opposed not only by consumers groups but also by the Financial Planning Association themselves. The third piece of the bonfire was the repeal of the charities commission.

As so many members of this House have pointed out—Jenny Macklin, the member for Jagajaga, and Senator Ursula Stephens being chief among them—the charities commission was put in place in order to reduce the regulatory burden on charities and to protect charitable donors to make sure that they had an agency to which they could lodge complaints if they were victims of scams. The charities commission has been supported by four out of five charities. In an open letter, charities—including Save the Children, St John Ambulance Australia, Volunteering Australia, Lifeline, the RSPCA, ACOSS, the Sidney Myer Fund, the Hillsong Church, Social Ventures Australia, the YMCA and the Queensland Theatre Company—have called for the ACNC to be retained. Instead, we have a bill from Minister Andrews which repeals the charities commission without saying what will come in its place. This is a bill which reads more like a media alert than a serious piece of legislation. It contains clauses such as:

'The successor Agency is the Agency specified in a determination under subitem (2).'

In fact, it is entirely unclear to the sector what the government intends should replace the charities commission. Perhaps that is why the government has put the debate off rather than having it occur this week as originally scheduled. If the Minister for Social Services will not trust the public with his plans, why should parliament entrust the minister with the power to do as he wishes?

The bill will not take effect until the passing of a subsequent bill which will outline what on earth the government wants to do in the area of charity regulation. For a government which says that is serious about reducing red tape it is striking to read in the explanatory memorandum:

'Since stage one does not detail the alternative arrangements, there are no direct impacts that can be quantified as costs and benefits faced by the civil sector. As a result, no indicative costings are provided in this RIS.'

So, this is the very definition of a ghost bill. If this bill were on the statute books today it would have been repealed in the bonfire of legislation, because it does nothing.

The problem is that the charities commission does something. The charities commission is strongly supported by the sector. Many charities say how much they appreciate an agency that understands their complexities and helps them to focus on what they do best—helping people. It protects donors and acts as a watchdog against scammers and dodgy charities. Indeed, in a few weeks time the ACNC will host an international charities law regulators forum, celebrating what Australia has achieved. The government claims that the ACNC is a failed model, but countries such as Ireland are looking at putting into place a model like the Australian charities commission, which enjoys broad support from the community.

By contrast, the government's plan to put charities law regulation back into the hands of the Australian Taxation Office received support from just six per cent of the charitable sector—that is how persuasive this government has been with the sector. I call on Minister Andrews to not put the ACNC on the bonfire. Do with the plans to scrap the charities commission what the government has done with its ill-thought-through financial advice legislation—press the pause button, help the charities sector and, if you must repeal ghost acts, make that your bonfire instead.