But the majority of Coalition MPs have steered clear of criticising the proposed deal, differentiating foreign investment in the greenfield project and land that will be leased, against the furore sparked by the recent controversial government approval to sell Australia?s largest cotton irrigation farm, Cubbie Station, to a Chinese-dominated consortium.
Reports surfaced yesterday that Chinese company Shanghai Zhongfu had won a bid to develop 15,400 hectares of prime agricultural land in WA?s far north, under the Ord River Stage 2 development.
It?s understood the WA State Government has not yet reached a final decision and has refused to confirm reports.
But speculation suggests a formal announcement will be made early next week, after State Cabinet formally considers the issue, after completing due diligence on a shortlist of contenders.
It?s understood the Australian Agricultural Company (AACo) was one of the unsuccessful bidders and has expressed disappointment.
Local reaction in WA?s far north is expected to be positive, with the region sharing a strong history of foreign investment that?s helped develop agricultural productivity and build job creation.
However, Mr McCormack said he was incensed to learn $500 million in taxpayer funds had gone into building roads, irrigation, port and local community infrastructure to support the deal.
He said the federal government had tipped in $195 million to leverage the development of irrigation farming in northern Australia but was tearing apart purpose-built irrigation areas in his Riverina electorate, ?paddy by paddy, channel by channel?, under the Murray-Darling Basin Plan.
Mr McCormack said the proposed Ord deal hasn?t yet been signed, but was guaranteed to be a ?fait accompli?.
He said the deal was being supported by the WA Nationals and was ultimately the WA State government?s responsibility.
But he said it was up to the federal government to step in and determine if the deal was in the national interest because of its $195 million contribution to back Shanghai Zhongfu.
?They?re not selling the actual dirt to the Chinese investors - but 50 years is a very, very long time to lease that amount of land, so they may as well be selling it,? he said.
?I can?t see that as being as something that?s in the national interest especially when there?s so much uncertainty around the Basin Plan.
?To my way of thinking, the Ord could potentially be a great irrigation district.
?But why do this for the Chinese when we could be protecting the Riverina irrigation district, which has been around for 100 years and will be around for another 100 years and longer??
Mr McCormack said the Foreign Investment Review Board?s national interest test needed to take into account whether the Chinese investors would be paying tax on any agricultural commodities they produced.
He said the company could potentially bypass the local economy and markets by selling produce, not just sugar, into markets where Australian product is already being sold to.
?Once they lease the land they can do what they like with it,? he said.
The deal forms part of the Ord-East Kimberley Expansion Project which is linked to the WA National Party?s heralded Royalties for Regions program.
The project currently employs around 280 locals, including about 90 indigenous people ? but another 400 full time jobs are expected once the new irrigation farms reach full capacity.
The Chinese company will only pay a peppercorn rent in return for clearing and developing the land.
WA?s shadow agriculture minister Paul Papalia questioned the deal?s value to taxpayers.
He expressed concerns the Chinese owned sugar mill to be constructed under the deal may not return any benefits to the State, if profits and produce are exported outside the local supply chain, including biofuels.
Nationals MP for Dawson George Christensen also criticised the federal government for contributing $195 million to the Ord deal, saying it was now subsidising foreign ownership of our agriculture land.
Mr Christensen represents the largest sugar-growing electorate in Australia and said the amount of taxpayer money ?poured? into infrastructure surrounding the project, went ?far beyond a simple matter of foreign ownership?.
?This is our government funding foreign companies to compete directly against our own farmers,? he said.
?You?ve got to wonder whose interests our governments are looking after in this deal.?
However, Canegrowers Australia backed the move, saying foreign investment has helped to build the national sugar industry over time.
They also welcomed sugar production in the Ord ? but only if the economic benefits are retained locally.
Assistant Treasurer David Bradbury seized on the Coalition?s ambivalence towards the Ord investment.
He singled out Queensland Nationals Senator Barnaby Joyce, who led the charge in criticising the Cubbie sale.
He said Senator Joyce had been, ?caught out freelancing on the Coalition?s economic policy again?.
However, he said Federal National Party leader Warren Truss was saying foreign investment proposals in northern Australia ?offer significant community benefits, new infrastructure, first stage processing of primary products and the creation of hundreds of new jobs?, while others were criticising it.
Queensland Independent Bob Katter also slammed news of the Chinese investment.
?Wake up Australia, they?re selling your country out from under you,? he said.
?Ask any Australian if it?s good idea to spend $500 million of taxpayers? money to subsidise a foreign company to come in so the profits can go overseas, most of the wages I?ll bet will go overseas, the ethanol goes overseas.
?And what do we get out of it? We get nothing.?
Mr Katter said his party would be moving legislation in the federal Parliament to stop the sale of Australian land to foreigners.
Mr Truss, Senator Joyce and AACo managing director David Farley were contacted by Fairfax Agricultural Media, but did not return calls before deadline.
new years eve ball drop new years eve times square 2012 2012 holidays prosperity japan earthquake bosom buddies diplo
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.