Mr PALLAS (Tarneit) — It gives me pleasure to rise to speak to the matter before the house. In so doing I can assuage any concerns that the Minister for Employment and Trade may have. There is no change in strategy or approach; we continue as an opposition to support the government’s efforts in terms of trade missions. We applaud every effort and endeavour by the government to seek to attract business to Victoria. In so saying I also wish to make the point that there is nothing more shallow, hollow or valueless than self-praise. When the state cries out for leadership and when the challenges that confront this state are as profound as they are, this government expects applause for simply getting up in the morning — that is, for doing its job.

Yes, there is bipartisan support for trade missions. It is a recent thing in terms of the change of government. I will show the house that the previous opposition did not indicate the same level of support in this chamber or in many other places when efforts were being made to attract business to this state.

Attracting business to Victoria is a critically important thing to do. The efforts to promote Victoria overseas should, of course, be supported. Labor undertook a lot of work in this area, including trade missions. We did not use the superlative ‘super trade mission’, as if somehow the bigger and more grandiose the adjective, the greater level of community applause we would get for our efforts, but our efforts were substantial. Victoria has ultimately been rewarded for these efforts, and I see the diligent work of public servants through various administrations continuing to reap rewards for Victoria. Those efforts have to be applauded and recognised. Ultimately the state of Victoria is the richer for them.

Profound challenges confront this state, and I wonder if the time of this place is best spent on self-congratulatory messages. Labor has supported this government’s continuation of the efforts to promote Victoria internationally, which is more than can be said for those opposite, who when in opposition railed against so-called overseas junkets. Of course it is the easiest form of sophistry to hide behind a justification that ‘What you were doing wasn’t good, but what we’re doing is good’ and that therefore hypocrisy can be shadowed in that pathetic effort to distinguish what has been a consistent line of policy approach by governments over the years.

For example, the member for Hastings, on 8 June 2010, attacked the then Minister for Education in this place, saying she had ‘returned from her junket to China’. The member for Benambra, on 14 October 2009 in this place, referred to the Premier’s ‘latest round-the-world junket’. The former Treasurer, the member for Scoresby, on 14 March 2000 in this place, said:

There have been some interesting ministerial statements about a junket to Davos …

So let us not pretend that there was a consensus and that those opposite showed a level of restraint and bipartisanship that is being generously offered by those on this side of the chamber. It did not exist. They cannot rewrite history. We are bigger than that. We are not going to talk down efforts of this government to seek to encourage trade because we understand the value of that to the state. I might say that the former Premier has recently been acknowledged by the Indian community for his efforts — and rightly so, because any efforts to encourage trade with South-East Asia, and with India and China, are critically important.

Let us think about this.

Even the minister who led the debate today, the Minister for Employment and Trade, interjected concerning a trade mission to New Zealand by this Parliament’s Committee for Economic Development and Infrastructure. On 19 July 2005 in this place the then Minister for Consumer Affairs, Tony Robinson, noted that there had been a trip to New Zealand by the Economic Development and Infrastructure Committee on 12 July 2005. The Hansard record notes that the member for Brighton interjected and the minister responded:

No, that is certainly the case — not a junket at all.

Let us not pretend that those opposite have ever shown the same level of humility and recognition of value that we on this side do.

Finally, let us not forget the former Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations, a man who no doubt would be a little bit nervous about overseas trips, having suffered a humiliating fate on one of them, who in the upper house on 18 July 2006, when in opposition, said:

Hang on! I remembered at the weekend that this is the same Premier who has just spent a quarter of a million dollars on his junket trip around the world …

These examples are clear demonstrations of this government’s two-faced opportunism. Given the experiences of the former Minister for Employment and Industrial Relations in relation to trade missions, there is no doubt that he would retain his low opinion of overseas travel, but this is a substantial issue. In many ways it is like the reverse of Hotel California, where you can check out, but you can never leave.

When you are a minister in this government who goes on a trade mission, you can sign up, but you can never come back.

On a more substantial issue, we are on the cusp of the Asian century. Of course we support greater engagement with Asia. The Asian region that we inhabit is reclaiming its historic place at the centre of the world economy. It has taken nearly 200 years, but there is no doubt that it is happening. Over 60 per cent of the world’s population lives in the Australian time zone. A big part of the growing Asian middle-class story is an urbanisation story, which includes iron, coal, concrete, steel and energy. This is where the tough bit comes in for the Victorian economy. It means the dollar will be a fair bit higher in the foreseeable future, although I note that there has been some relief, albeit marginal, with the drop in the value of the Australian dollar. I might say that would come as welcome relief to exporters.

The post-float high, even with the recent fall, still poses substantial challenges for Victorian exporters. Right now, with growth and debt fears stalking the global economy, our dollar is doubly pushed up by a safe haven effect. All these things are testament to a strong national economy, but we all know there is a picture of light and shade for Victoria. We all know that shade is with jobs growth, retail turnover and construction work, all sliding recently as the dollar piles more and more pressure on our economy in general and manufacturing areas in particular. Recent industry job figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics show that these sectors are suffering particularly in Victoria. The weakest industries for employment growth have been construction and retail.

In the construction industry Victoria lost 13 500 construction jobs, including 7140 full-time jobs, in the May quarter. The total loss since November 2010 quarter is 8890 jobs. Full-time jobs in the sector have gone backwards by 13 200 since November 2010. In retail, Victoria lost 13 700 jobs in the last quarter, including 9230 full-time jobs. The total jobs lost since November 2010 is 18 500, with 9230 of those being full-time jobs. Manufacturing somehow managed to gain 300 jobs in the last quarter but has fallen back by 16 480 jobs since November 2010. There is no reason for self-congratulation and self-praise. Rather this government should be committing itself to the consistency of policy that was demonstrated by the previous government and to follow through on these issues, albeit that it has been far from consistent in its attitude towards overseas trade missions in the past.

All this self-congratulation on attending trade missions is going too far.

In 2012 Victorian industry exported more than $33.6 billion in goods and services — below the record high, might I say, of $33.8 billion, which was recorded in 2008. Our share of Australia’s total exports of services is less than it was in 2009. Why the increase in port licence fees if trade is going so well? We have recently seen a further hike in the port licence fee. In justifying the hike the port of Melbourne claimed that the underrecovery of the total amount of the port licence fee in 2012-13, which was approximately $3 million, was due to a decrease in total trade throughput compared to the original forecast, which will carry over into the following financial year, commencing 1 July.

Let us get this clear. What the port is saying is, ‘We didn’t meet our export targets, and we are going to doubly hit all those users of our port services to make up the shortfall’. That is how miserable this government is.

It can talk the talk about looking after exporters, but when it comes down to it, when it underrecovers, when our economy is performing in such a way that there are reduced expectations for state revenue, what is its first response? Its first response is to hit the port users twice. It says, ‘We didn’t get what we expected last year. You might be suffering a bit, but let’s hit you with more to recoup the shortfall’.

And of course let us not forget what the member for South-West Coast said in this place on 2 March 2000. He said:

It is no good for the Premier to travel overseas and trumpet Victoria if at home he is failing to provide the necessary leadership and direction to provide a secure environment for investors.

Those are the words of the member for South-West Coast, the now Premier of the state. The hypocrisy of it all is breathtaking. This effort to oversell the Victorian economy does us no favours at all. The Treasurer, that question-time quisling, gets up under the protection of the Speaker in his 4 minutes of self-promotion every question time in this place and rails against the warnings of the opposition about the attention that needs to be paid to the economy. Two can play at that game, and I note that the Age reported that the federal shadow Treasurer, Mr Hockey, said it was ‘the height of hubris’ to dismiss warnings from respected observers of a possible downturn. Of course our Treasurer would know a lot about hubris. In this case the warnings of the opposition are echoed by Westpac, by CommSec and by Tim Colebatch in the Age. But of course according to the government these are things that should be dismissed, and instead we should spend more time congratulating ourselves for going overseas on a trade mission.

The Premier used to pay attention to Tim Colebatch, but he does not anymore. On 13 September 2006 he said this:

I refer to further comment in the Age of 8 September:

On Wednesday, the Bureau of Statistics told us that demand in the Victorian economy was virtually flat in the first half of 2006. Total spending in trend terms grew just 0.1 per cent in six months, in itself suggesting that Victoria was barely escaping recession.

Goodness gracious me. We have the now Premier of the state applying a measure that he argues the opposition should never seek to apply. Indeed he had the temerity to use the R word in this place in opposition. He has lost that temerity now. This is a government that specialises in hypocrisy, that extolls its own efforts at self-promotion and self-congratulation but that does not recognise that the Victorian economy has substantial problems. Private sector investment fell by nearly 21 per cent in the first quarter of 2013. Of course that is a matter of great concern, but the concern would never figure prominently in the minds of government members because they would much prefer to spend time distracting us by talking about their efforts on a trade mission — which we support, unlike those opposite when they were in opposition. This government should get on with the job.

See Tim’s speech in Hansard here.