Jamie Briggs MP

Well we are going to be talking about Inverbrackie now with the Member for Mayo, which is of course the Adelaide Hills and there is a couple of other issues we will chat with Jamie Briggs about, he joins me now. G’day Jamie.

BRIGGS:

Matthew, how are you?

PANTELIS:

Very well, thank you. So you have got concerns about how much it is costing to set up the housing there?

BRIGGS:

I think nearly $40,000 for renovations at the Inverbrackie site per property, nearly $4 million dollars all up, is too much money, let’s be honest. I think most people would have expected that the properties were largely liveable and certainly when I toured around there they looked in reasonable condition, they might have needed some fit out absolutely, but I think that to nearly spend $40,000 per property really does sum up the amount of waste and mis-management that this Government is occurring in this portfolio area.

PANTELIS:

Do you know what the money has been spent on, I mean when you say do up, is it you know, new plumbing, is it painting, what has it been?

BRIGGS:

It is hard to get information out of the Government, they are not particularly forthcoming. This took us 6 months to get this answer, so we don’t know exactly. It is broken into two amounts, it is $6,500 dollars of fit outs, of you know washing machines, microwaves and flat screen TVs and DVD players and CD players, that cost $6,500 and then there is $32,500 for each property on average for upgrades. Now we don’t know what that means, we don’t know what they got for that, but it does seem to be an excessive amount of money. Let’s not forget that defence families lived in these properties right up until just about the time it was taken over by the Immigration Department, so I think it is excessive and it really is further evidence of the Government’s failure to manage this issue properly. We know throughout the system, Matthew that there is a $1.7 billion dollar blow out and this of course is part of that extra expenditure because the boats keep arriving.

PANTELIS:

Jamie, a lot people listening would be saying, well I could use a new DVD player or CD player. Are those things necessary?

BRIGGS:

Well look that is a good question.

PANTELIS:

Washing machine you can understand.

BRIGGS:

Mmm

PANTELIS:

But the rest of it, I mean thats luxury items, isn’t it?

BRIGGS:

Well I think people at the moment with cost of living pressures really putting family budgets under strain, would have legitimate concerns about some of the items that are listed that have been included in the fit out. Obviously we want people treated properly and that is what we have said all along but you know we have had instances where there have been large amounts spent on overseas telephone calls, from each of these centres including at Inverbrackie. And there has been now, you know we see is being spent on upgrading properties which were in pretty good condition; it has got to be said.

PANTELIS:

How much on telephone calls?

BRIGGS:

The latest figures we have got were I think from memory, this last week were included in the $27 million all up which is costing to open and run Inverbrackie since last December, which is a lot of money in itself. I understand it is about $150,000 I think for the total phone contract for the site. So that includes staff and so forth. But obviously a component of that are phone calls from people who are being processed at that facility.

PANTELIS:

Is that fair enough? I mean I understand that if we are going to be detaining people for a number of years, you know we should be giving them some access to people at home, but at what point do you cap that?

BRIGGS:

Yes and that is a good point. And we had Scott Morrison, the Coalition Spokesperson on this issue has been making that point in relation to other sites, where the bill are quite astronomical and again it gets back to people expect us in Canberra to spend their money properly and you know it needs a level of oversight and there are a couple of issues here. Firstly it is very difficult to get this information from the Government and when you do get it, it does seem contain a large amount of waste and mismanagement in it. Ultimately the best way to reduce the cost of this program is to stop the boats from coming in the first place. Now of course, back in 2007 the Howard Government had stopped the boats coming. The Labor Government changed the law in 2008 and since that time we have seen 12,000 people arrive and that is why we have seen these astronomical blow outs and we really do need a long term solution, which was in place under the Howard Government, reintroduced to not only stop these people from getting on the boats in the first place, but then stop the cost that is borne by the Australian taxpayer.

PANTELIS:

Jamie, given the Government’s offshore processing plans are virtually non-existent at the moment, do you fear Inverbrackie ramping up in years to come, or in months to come?

BRIGGS:

Well the Government has ruled that out every time we have raised that and I have specifically written to Chris Bowen because he made a very direct process to a community meeting which he attended last November, we both attended up at Lobethal, about this issue and he told the community at that point that there would never be an extension to the 400 who are currently there. He has since confirmed that in writing to me, they have answered questions on the record, saying that it won’t go above 400. So you know, you have got to take I guess a little bit, the Government at its word to a degree, of course this is the same political party who promised not to introduce a carbon tax prior to the last election and now we see them doing that. So it is something that we have to conscious of, but undoubtedly what the failure of their latest plan will mean more boats will arrive and there will be a longer need for the Inverbrackie Detention Facility. From our perspective, from the Coalition’s perspective, we have said that we will process all of these people on Nauru through the Pacific Solution and in that sense we have already indicated that we won’t be continuing with the use of Inverbrackie as a detention facility.

PANTELIS:

To another issue which will affect a lot of your constituents and this is the state based issue, but of course the NRM plans on meters on farm land and dams etc.  What do you make of that? What is your position?

BRIGGS:

I haven’t seen the full detail, in fact I was just speaking to one of my staff just before to get an update. I noticed that it was a big story in the Advertiser today and also I understand that you have been covering it quite extensively this morning. I have spoken with numerous occasions this morning and on numerous occasions to farmers in the Adelaide Hills and the Fleurieu Peninsula and I think their concerns are valid. I think the concern that this is just another State Labor Government tax, rather than an attempt to do something proactively about water is a valid concern. I am concerned about the powers of the NRM, I think there are some issues of the respect and I know the State Opposition, through Isobel Redmond has been seeking to find ways to try and address that so I will be seeking information from not only what has been released today, but also constituents who have come to us with their concerns to find out what this means and find out what can be done from here.

PANTELIS:

And the other issues, which is perhaps more a federal issue, is the figures released by the ABS on Friday about SA farming land, having the highest foreign ownership of any state in Australia and only second to the Northern Territory, of some 12 percent at the moment, is that an issue that you would be interested in taking up federally in Parliament or you know through the Minister?

BRIGGS:

Well look I have seen the figures. At the end of the day Australia has always had foreign investment, since 1788 we have been a country that has accepted overseas capital, we require I too. I think there is two issues here, the issue relating to whether it is sovereign purchase, in other words, other governments. Now of course, there are provisions in the Foreign Investment Review Board now which allow or ensure the Government must review and make a decision on those purchases if they occur. Now I am not sure what percent of the 12 percent, it is not clear to me what if any actual foreign government owned. Otherwise if they are companies, then obviously companies as I say have been investing in Australia for a long time. They own dairy farms, they own dairy processing companies. Now of course we know that the two big dairy processing companies in Australia are owned by overseas companies, so there are, you need to look at this in the sense I think in a holistic approach and also consider that there are two aspects of this, which is the sovereign purchase and that of company.

PANTELIS:

Alright,well Jamie Briggs, Member of Mayo in the Adelaide Hills, thank you for your time today.

BRIGGS:

Good on you Matt, thanks for that.