Warren Truss (Wide Bay, National Party, Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Hansard source

The government will not be supporting the amendments moved by the honourable member for Grayndler. Let me begin by assuring the House that the government has no intention whatsoever of getting rid of the Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity program. We recognise that it is a program of value. The heavy vehicle industry pays a road user charge and they expect that money would be spent on projects of benefit to the road transport industry. We will continue to do that.

There is no need to include these amendments or the references that the shadow minister is talking about in the legislation. He did not do it when he was the minister. These clauses were not in the act. It is not as though we are removing them; he is asking that they be added. If it were necessary to have them in the act, he would have been in the position to do it when the Labor Party was in government,. The reality is that this program is covered by the existing provisions in the act. It is covered by the legislation that was in place under the previous government and it has not changed under this government.

We certainly are committed to delivering this particular program and we will deliver it with enthusiasm and genuine commitment. However, these amendments increase duplication and increase the administrative burden on funding recipients for no real value. The proposed part 7A for the Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Project duplicates existing provisions in the act. The heavy vehicle safety and productivity projects are currently approved under either part 3 or part 6 of the act, depending on whether they are on or off the National Land Transport Network. The Land Transport Infrastructure Amendment Bill 2014 is combining the existing part 3 and part 6 into a new part 3 to remove the duplication from the act. The proposed part 7A would undo this if the opposition's amendments were to be accepted. The proposed part 7A also increases the record-keeping burden on funding recipients by requiring them to maintain records for heavy vehicle safety and productivity projects for five years under the proposed clause 84R. Funding recipients are not required to keep these records under the existing part 3 and part 6 or the new part 3. So this kind of record keeping was not required when Labor was in government.

We are a government that believes in less regulation and less red tape. These amendments add substantial burden to those who are receiving these grants. For that reason, it does not really seem to me to make much sense. Labor had the capacity to put this kind of prescription in the legislation when they were in office, they did not choose to do so. To do it now adds administrative burden to those who receive the grants and duplicates existing sections in the act. For those reasons, we do not support the amendments.

See this speech in context