John Cobb (Calare, National Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Hansard source

As 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 I do so knowing that the transport industry is always under pressure. The owner-operators of trucks—and there are thousands of them; they are probably the biggest class of self-employed small business people in Australia—by and large are under the most competitive pressure of almost any small business people in Australia. They do a good job. Unfortunately I think they are taken advantage of at times by big companies and big operators, because a lot of their work is subcontract work. Obviously this country is very dependent upon road usage, road haulage, and always will be. But it is acknowledged by everybody that we need to get as much as possible onto rail—not so much the current amount of goods moved around Australia, but the increase that is going to happen over the next 10 to 15 years. We need to get it onto rail rather than have it all come on road, because common sense says we are not going to lower the amount of goods that are hauled around Australia. The object certainly is to get as much of the increase, especially the long haulage increase, onto rail as is possible.

The first part of the bill, as has been mentioned by others, we basically agree with. The fact that the Commonwealth registration situation is coming into line with the changes made by the state governments to user charges we pretty much agree with. It is good to see that FIRS will continue to exist. It does provide an alternative—competition if you like—to what is done by the states. I think in one sense it keeps them on their toes—and they know it, because registration is a very big income stream for state governments, particularly New South Wales—and while ever FIRS exists, which is an alternative registration situation, if they get too out of line, then instead of registering with New South Wales or Victoria or whichever state it might be, operators do have an alternative. I believe that is a good thing.

It is very important that the approximately $88 million that will be raised out of these increased user charges—and I certainly hope that the current government takes note of the fact—is spent by the government state counterparts on roads and not stuck into general revenue. In New South Wales, certainly, that is something that will need to be watched pretty carefully, given the desperate situation of the government and their desire to simply try to keep Sydney, Wollongong and Newcastle thinking at least that they are being looked after. There is no guarantee that that money will be spent on roads and certainly no guarantee at all that it will be spent outside of the Sydney basin.

There are some issues in the Road Charges Legislation Repeal and Amendment Bill that we are far less comfortable with. In March this year the government attempted to bring in what was in effect indexation—something brought in by Labor originally that we put a stop to in 2001—when they increased the charges for trucks. I think to line it up in an indexation sense was a very dangerous thing to do. The fact that they have removed that section from this bill is obviously a good thing. They will no longer be able to automatically increase those charges to the trucking industry or to any other sector of the road industry. I acknowledge that that is no longer there. Once again, though, the extra almost 2c that will be gathered from heavy road users really does need to go into roads.

As I look at New South Wales in particular it would seem that the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government is very keen to help New South Wales out in urban transport rather than the roads and the passage of goods around the country. One of the things that he seems to have totally ignored, forgotten or deliberately put aside is the need to put through a Melbourne to Brisbane rail link, which is called the western route, which would go through—

See this speech in context