General Debate

Infrastructure

House of Representatives · Monday 7 September 2026

Official Hansard for this day (APH) · Read this debate on OpenAustralia

At a glance

The debate centred on a motion moved by the Australian Labor Party commending the government's infrastructure spending in the territories and its broader commitment to national infrastructure. Labor members highlighted specific investments in Canberra and the Northern Territory, including road upgrades, community facilities, and rail improvements, while criticising the previous government for neglect. Opposition members argued that the current government engaged in pork-barrelling by directing funds to marginal seats and had reduced funding shares for regional roads, leading to deteriorating conditions. They also raised concerns about corruption in state-level projects and the failure to address urgent safety issues in regional New South Wales and South Australia.

Outcome

The motion was not put to a vote as no seconder was found.

Summary in reported speech - not a transcript. AI-generated, so check the official record before quoting.

How the debate unfolded

Opened the debate

Alicia Payne (Canberra) (Australian Labor Party) ALP

Payne moved the motion to recognise the government's delivery of infrastructure in the Australian Capital Territory and Northern Territory. Payne highlighted the commitment to a new convention centre and a $68.9 million investment in a new Canberra aquatic centre. Payne noted the $50 million allocated for the duplication of Drake-Brockman Drive and further funding for the Sydney-Canberra rail corridor. Payne also mentioned the $50 million contribution towards planning for Canberra Light Rail Stage 2B. Payne argued that these investments addressed long-standing needs and demonstrated respect for the nation's capital.

Opposition response

Ben Small (Forrest) (Liberal Party) Liberal

Small argued that the government had failed to end pork-barrelling, citing data that showed over 93 per cent of funding from two major infrastructure programs went to Labor-held seats. Small stated that nearly 94 per cent of multicultural community program funding also targeted Labor electorates, particularly marginal ones. Small claimed these programs used non-competitive processes where only invited organisations could apply. Small announced that he had referred both programs to the Auditor-General to investigate whether funding decisions were driven by partisan politics rather than assessed need.

Marion Scrymgour (Lingiari) (Australian Labor Party) ALP support

Scrymgour detailed infrastructure investments in the Northern Territory, including the sealing of the Santa Teresa Road and upgrades under the Central Australia Plan. Scrymgour highlighted projects in the Barkly region, such as a boarding school in Tennant Creek and youth spaces, as well as road upgrades on Melville Island and the Central Arnhem Highway. Scrymgour criticised the Northern Territory government for delays in delivering funded projects and argued that federal investment was essential for keeping bush communities viable.
Tom Venning (Grey) (Liberal Party) Liberal oppose

Venning contended that the government had reduced the Commonwealth contribution for significant road works from 80 per cent to 50 per cent, causing substandard conditions and worsening roads in regional South Australia. Venning pointed to the quick decline of a dual carriageway on Highway 1 as proof of low quality. Venning compared this with more than $1 billion spent in his electorate under the former coalition government. Venning also condemned the $3.8 billion given to Victoria's Big Build, claiming large amounts were wasted through corruption.
Luke Gosling (Solomon) (Australian Labor Party) ALP support

Gosling stated that the government had committed $2.8 billion to Northern Territory infrastructure over ten years, including $24 million for dangerous intersections in Darwin. Gosling listed major upgrades to freight corridors such as the Tanami Road, Central Arnhem Road, and the Stuart Highway. Gosling argued that the previous coalition government had frozen road maintenance funding and left behind uncosted projects. Gosling called on the Northern Territory government to provide plans to utilise the available federal funding for road improvements.
Alison Penfold (Lyne) (National Party) Nationals oppose

Penfold argued that the government had stalled funding for real regional Australia, despite her pre-budget submission outlining extensive needs in the Lyne electorate. Penfold claimed credit for major projects like the M1 and Pacific Highway belonged to the previous coalition government. Penfold highlighted specific safety concerns, including near-misses at the Bucketts Way and Medowie Road intersections, and the death of a young girl at the King Creek Road intersection. Penfold criticised the state government for failing to prioritise these black spots and called for a coalition government to invest in regional infrastructure.

Opened by

Alicia Payne (Canberra) (Australian Labor Party)

ALP

Speeches

7 speeches, 4 other contributors

Topics

Infrastructure & Transport Integrity & Parliament Regional Australia

Debate Health Insurance Amendment (Incentive Payments and Other Measures) Bill 2026; Second Reading Bill Debate, 16 Sep 2026 · Shared topics: Integrity & Parliament, Regional Australia
Debate Australian Parliament General Debate, 17 Sep 2026 · Shared topic: Integrity & Parliament
Question Time House Question Time 17 Sep 2026 · Shared topics: Infrastructure & Transport, Integrity & Parliament
Question Time House Question Time 30 Jun 2026 · Shared topics: Infrastructure & Transport, Integrity & Parliament

About House of Representatives debates

The House of Representatives debates bills, motions and matters of public importance in its main chamber. Members from all parties can take part, and the responsible minister usually replies for the government. Summaries are in reported speech, not transcripts; always check the official record before quoting.