Ian Macfarlane (Groom, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Energy and Resources) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Interstate Road Transport Charge Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2008 and the Road Charges Legislation Repeal and Amendment Bill 2008, and also in support of the transport industry in Australia, which is part of the lifeblood of our economy. Truck driving is an arduous, difficult and dangerous occupation. As one of the few members in this House who has a heavy-vehicle licence—that is, a licence to drive a truck—I have great admiration for the road transport industry. These rigs, which are worth hundreds of thousands of dollars—some of them are worth more than half a million dollars—are not only essential in the transport of our goods but take real skill and capability to manoeuvre on the road in a way which maintains the safety of not only the trucking industry but, more importantly, the general public, who at times are held in awe by the size of these vehicles and the speed at which they travel. They travel at the same speed as a normal motor vehicle and they are able to stop in a more than safe distance, but they do require highly skilled operators—men and women who are dedicated to the profession. Part of my speech on these bills will deal with some of the issues which those men and women face as they go about their day-to-day activity of not only earning an income for their family but also, importantly, transporting goods across Australia. These goods provide the powerhouse of Australia in the energy they deliver to households every day, as well as to industry which, in turn, provides jobs.

The transport task in Australia is going to increase dramatically over the years ahead. We need to ensure that the industry is sustainable—sustainable in terms of its economics, sustainable in terms of obtaining people with the skill set and the desire to drive these rigs often from one side of Australia to the other and sustainable in terms of the infrastructure that those people travel on and the service they provide.

These two bills implement new charge-setting elements of the heavy vehicle industry: the registration charge and the road user charge, which is deducted from the fuel excise rebate paid to operators of heavy vehicles, an arrangement that was introduced by the previous government. The Interstate Road Transport Charge Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2008 applies the first feature of this legislation—that is, it deals with the registration charges that apply to the five per cent of heavy vehicles registered under the Australian government’s Federal Interstate Registration Scheme. Commonwealth, state and territory transport ministers agreed to these new charges in February in a process that was undertaken to provide an outcome, and that process included consultation with the industry. Therefore, the states and territories have already implemented the new schedule. This means that 95 per cent of Australia’s truck fleet are already paying for the charges.

The Road Charges Legislation Repeal and Amendment Bill 2008 puts in place the second charge-setting feature, the road user charge. At the moment, the road user charge is set by the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government using a feature of the Fuel Tax Act 2006. This bill will amend the Fuel Tax Act 2006 and set the road user charge at 21c per litre. It will also enable new regulation to change or index that charge. The bill also repeals the Road Transport Charges (Australian Capital Territory) Act 1993 to allow the ACT to set its own registration charges, a practical amendment which the coalition in opposition supports.

The history of these bills is very much part of the continued development of legislation around and applying to the heavy transport industry in Australia. The coalition recognises that the changes that have been made in these two bills were presented in essentially similar terms earlier this year to the House. Importantly, changes have been made to ensure the Commonwealth maintains the discretion to determine its own charges on federally registered trucks. This is important as it allows for competitive pressures to be applied to state registration fees and in turn ensures maximum efficiencies in state based regulation systems, bringing into play a very important facet of this bill.

The reality is that states can, by and large, charge whatever they like for registration. Some states allow their own quirkiness and peculiarities to come into the equation. Thus, having an anchor, a cornerstone or a point at which their charges can be judged is extremely important. It may only affect five per cent of the fleet, but it provides a base from which not only state governments can be judged but also the industry itself can say, ‘This federal charge is based on a transparent policy which we understand,’ because it is involved in consultation with the federal departments. Therefore, its arguments are strengthened when it goes forward to argue its cases on the balance of trucks that are registered under state schemes.

It is important also that the legislation has been changed to remove annual adjustment fees to fees based on costs related to road construction and maintenance. This could have been in the order of seven to eight per cent, and it would have been a huge impost on the trucking industry, which is already bearing the burden of high fuel costs and the impact of global financial pressures.

The trucking industry is an industry where profit margins are slim. It is an industry which requires a huge amount of investment. As I say, these rigs—B-doubles and, in western areas, B-triples, double-B-double road trains and other massive rigs—can cost up to $1 million. If you are operating a three-B-double combination—that is, effectively six trailers pulled behind a prime mover—it is more than possible that, by the time you put all the extra electronic monitoring equipment on it, you could be approaching a million dollar investment. Also, if you own one, you tend, as is always the case, to own half-a-dozen.

So you have truck fleets worth millions of dollars. You are then employing men and women to drive them—predominantly men. I am informed that women are gentler on trucks, and I also hear that is the case in the mining industry. From my previous profession, I also know that women harvesting contractors have a lighter touch. But the industry still is predominantly a male domain. These men and women have to be paid, and it is a profession which requires them to be away from home. So, on top of the initial capital expenditure, you have the wages and the conditions for the drivers. Then, as is always the case, fuel costs are a very significant part of operations. We see an industry that is very competitive and that operates in an environment where costs fluctuate almost on a weekly basis with fuel prices. This industry could not have borne the burden of the extra costs associated with road construction and maintenance. The removal of the annual adjustment of that is certainly important.

The coalition recognises the importance of a consistent regulatory regime to the trucking industry that covers all of Australia. That is of particular importance to the trucking industry because an industry which operates the same truck in perhaps every state or at least in four or five states, sometimes in the same week, needs to know that the rules are consistent. If they have a fleet based in Brisbane they need to know that the rules are the same as for a fleet based in Adelaide or Melbourne or Perth or Sydney. The coalition therefore has no objection to the Interstate Road Transport Charge Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2008 component of this legislation. The bulk of this tax is already being collected, as I said earlier, as the states have already implemented the changes.

The coalition also has no objection to the element of the Road Charges Legislation Repeal and Amendment Bill 2008 as it applies in the ACT. Without the change, ACT truck owners would be paying higher registration fees than those in the states. The second component of the bill lifts the road user charge to 21c per litre from 1 January next year. The idea behind this is to recover some of the costs that are incurred from heavy vehicle use on our roads. No-one denies that there is a cost associated with that, and the road transport industry certainly acknowledge that they need to make a contribution. Currently the road user charge is 19.633c per litre, which is calculated by applying a rebate to the 38.14c a litre in tax that the trucking industry pays per litre of fuel. The coalition acknowledges that changes have been made to this provision from the original position, in which it was linked to indexation and was essentially the reintroduction of the indexation of fuel.

In terms of industry consultation, there has been a comprehensive, consistent and safe system of road regulation in Australia, and that is a fundamental part of road transport in this country. It must be transparent, it must be accountable and it must be developed in close consultation with the industry. The coalition has long believed that sharing the load is an important part of the system and that the trucking and transport sector should make a financial contribution for the betterment of the entire transport network in Australia. The industry certainly agrees. It is a collective responsibility; it is one which is shared, but it is a responsibility on all of us. However, this legislation should not lead to the declaration of open season for a tax grab on the sector. It is important that it should not be a one-way street.

The Rudd government has made it very clear that its proposed four-year, $70 million, heavy vehicle safety and productivity package, which will fund the construction of roadside facilities and trials for electronic monitoring equipment, is a commitment that is contingent upon the successful passage of this bill. I express my support for the investment through this package. The construction of roadside facilities, though, has not been defined. We do not know where they will be and we do not know when they will be constructed. We hope that the package will include a transparent process to ensure that these facilities are built where the industry needs them. The industry knows this issue best. It is very easy when you are driving a motor vehicle from A to B and see a truck stop on the side of the road to wonder: ‘Why is that there?’ The reality is that the truck using that stop may have started its journey in Melbourne, Adelaide or perhaps even Perth and that that truck stop is strategically placed not only to give the driver the opportunity to rest but, probably more importantly, the opportunity to rest as per the legislation—that is, that he or she does not exceed the number of hours before a rest is required to comply with the legislation.

As I mentioned earlier, the road transport industry is a crucial part of Australia’s future economic growth. This is important in looking at where Australia goes with infrastructure—and I note the government’s infrastructure fund becomes more and more complicated and less and less transparent every day. I also note the fund is currently allocated $20 billion, which is substantially less than was promised by the Howard government. If the coalition had been re-elected we would have been spending more than $30 billion on infrastructure in Australia. Particularly in the area I come from, that infrastructure would have been crucially important to the development of South-East Queensland. There is a massive amount of road transport going on in Australia at the moment. Road transport is the key to economic growth, so it should be no surprise to anyone that the areas where there is very high pressure on the infrastructure because of the need for extra freight tasks are those with high population growth. Talking of high population growth, I see the member for Braddon sitting over on the other side of the House. I know he has some beautiful roads down there in Tasmania but high population growth perhaps is not his most immediate problem.

See this speech in context