Harry Jenkins (Scullin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I want to go to two matters—land transport and regions. My question on land transport follows on from the questions of the member for New England, who champions the Melbourne to Brisbane rail link. The federal government has to see transport in a wider guise than just roads. I appreciate the comments that the minister has made about the future of funding, but this goes in a national sense to the need to have links such as the rail link from Brisbane to Melbourne, which is important for freight. The region that I live in, northern Melbourne, will become the gateway. There is already an inland port at Somerton that can link in, so potentially it will be a very big employment generator for the northern region.

When we assist in local roads, we should also understand that local roads should go hand in hand with public transport. The minister has disappointed me in public comments that he has made. He has said that he does not see public transport as a role for the federal government and that it should be a responsibility of states and territories. But he really has to look at this. If our cities are to develop in a sustainable way, the federal government will have to show national leadership and involve itself. If we are going to look at sustainable cities, we have to look at different ways of moving people around for employment, education and even for recreation. I hope that when he puts his portfolio point of view in the discussions the whole-of-government decision will be that there is a need for the federal government to be involved in a wider range of land transport than just roads.

The second issue that I want to raise touches upon the regions. I have mentioned the regional impact on northern Melbourne of the Brisbane to Melbourne rail because of the potential for us to become the gateway. In other times we could perhaps have called the minister an agrarian socialist, but now he has moved into his new liberal mode. I am not sure whether I have had this discussion with him, but National Party members have usually had an easier time discussing regional matters because they represent rural regions. As a member for an electorate in an outer urban area, I say that the northern region of Melbourne is distinct. It is distinct from the western region. The member for Holt was in here earlier. It is distinct from his region. It concerns me that under consideration is the amalgamation of area consultative councils that operate in metropolitan Melbourne. I have not looked at the performance of the Sydney consultative council that covers the whole of greater Sydney. I have briefly discussed issues concerning the one in Perth. Looking at the region that the electorate of Scullin is part of—it has only 700,000 people—it will be competing in a region of four million people with only one ACC.

I hope that the minister can see that in metropolitan areas we can define distinct regions and that the ACCs that have been operating in Melbourne do champion the cause of our metropolitan regions. I hope that that can continue. I would be concerned that, on the basis of some form of economic rationalism, we would throw out what has been a very good system in metropolitan Melbourne—even accounting for the fact that, from time to time, with schemes such as Regional Partnerships, we have been concerned at the lack of transparency. That is because some of that money has been allocated outside of the ACC processes. I think that it is very important to place on record here that in the case of the five metropolitan Melbourne ACCs we have a system that is not broken, so please do not tamper with it.

See this speech in context