Jill Hall (Shortland, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

The contribution of the member for Cowper to this debate was disappointing, to say the least. He criticised the states and lauded the government’s achievements rather than arguing for a whole-of-government approach in conjunction with the private sector. The kinds of statements made by the member for Cowper highlight the reasons why there are problems in our rail network across the nation.

As a member of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Transport and Regional Services I have learned how vital an efficient, well-maintained system is to the economic viability of our nation. Historically, rail has been of great importance to the development of regional Australia, and many of our great regional centres are located where they are because of their access to rail. For much of Australia’s history, rail has been the lifeblood of the nation.

The reports Tracking Australia, Revitalising rail and Progress in rail reform identify key areas that need to be addressed to make our rail a system for the 21st century. I would like to highlight now some of the recommendations in the reports. There is a need for a more comprehensive land transport plan. I am currently involved in another inquiry by the House of Representatives transport and regional services committee which is looking at ‘the role of Australia’s regional arterial road and rail networks in the national freight transport task’.

One of the things that has been brought home to me most clearly is the need for a comprehensive land transport plan. It seems to me that there is an ad hoc approach to so many issues related to transport. If we are really serious about developing our land transport and about being economically viable, we must have that comprehensive land transport plan. The reports state that there needs to be additional investment in interstate tracking—that is, the upgrading and straightening of rail lines. That is vitally important to our nation.

I have spoken about rail a couple of times before in this parliament and on both those occasions I identified the problem in relation to rail from Sydney to Melbourne. That problem still has not been fixed and Sydney is still a major bottleneck when it comes to rail. There is currently a proposal for an inland rail track between Brisbane and Melbourne. Whilst that sounds very good, and I am not opposed to it, I believe that what really needs to be addressed is the bottleneck around Sydney and the upgrading of the main freight line.

We need also to look at whether we need to have specially designated freight lines in our rail system. We need better management of access to national rail, competitive neutrality between private and government owned operatives and neutrality in conditions that affect competition between the different modes of transport, especially between road and rail. These issues were highlighted in the committee’s last report, and they are coming up again in our current inquiry.

It is really important to highlight the competitive nature of road and rail and to highlight that every user in Australia pays for the transport of freight by road but for rail it is only the government that invests in the infrastructure and those companies involved in the investment of infrastructure. Rail has significant environmental benefits to our nation, and from a social aspect it also contributes to our nation.

An integrated transport system that recognises the role of all forms of transport—rail, road and shipping—will develop the best economic outcomes for Australia while minimising the social and environmental costs. Australia needs a comprehensive land management plan, and it is important that the government commits to this plan now and immediately recognises the importance of rail by increasing and immediately funding it through AusLink. (Time expired)

See this speech in context