Lisa Chesters (Bendigo, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I too rise in support of the amendments before the House. I am one of those MPs with a rural electorate. I know too well, not only from media reports but also from conversations that I have had in my community, how important road safety is. With thousands of country roads, streets, highways, intersections, rail crossings—and the list continues—I am sad to say that road safety continues to be one of those hot-button issues in my electorate.

I am relieved that this bill will continue the Roads to Recovery and Black Spots funding, programs that in recent years have seen over $10.5 million spent in my electorate to fund much-needed upgrades. In a meeting with the Macedon Ranges CEO, he said: 'The funding we have received from Roads to Recovery has fixed 10 years worth of roads that we would be able to fix on our normal rate base. Thank you.'

Black Spots is directly targeted at identified roads where there have been more accidents than normal. Those are pretty dark words to be linked to a federal government program. Small councils have small rates bases, yet large regional areas and a number of roads. They struggle to maintain these roads, which is why it is so important that federal governments partner with local governments to tackle these issues. What is disappointing is that the government has not agreed to enshrine in the legislation the Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program. It is also disappointing that the government has not agreed to consult with Infrastructure Australia before approving projects, which would provide greater transparency around decision-making when it comes to large infrastructure projects. Under the former Labor government, funding did flow in my electorate in relation to the Heavy Vehicle Safety and Productivity Program. In fact, last year alone just under $400,000 was delivered to central Victoria to improve a number of trouble spots. This funding not only improved the safety of those working in livestock saleyards, and upgraded other facilities; it also increased and improved productivity.

Any program that improves the safety of workers and roads can only be a good thing. That is why I believe it is important that this program also be enshrined in the bill and the legislation before us. These amendments will help protect rural truck drivers and their families.

Heavy vehicle legislation is also being addressed through the new Road Safety Remuneration Tribunal, which was again established by the former Labor government and commenced operations in July 2012. The object of this act is to promote safety and fairness in the road transport industry—again, going back to my initial point that road safety and improving the safety of workers on roads can only be a good thing. To describe the tribunal as red tape proves the government prefers ideology over trying to find ways to save lives on our roads.

I think the second amendment is a vital one in ensuring Infrastructure Australia is consulted before the approval of any major projects to ensure that there is greater transparency around decision making. Many stakeholders are calling for this in my own area. In central Victoria, a debate rages about the East West tunnel and whether the $8 billion being spent on that tunnel is at the expense of safety in our country and regional areas. Instead of allocating these funds to our regional highways, arterial roads and local roads that are falling apart and riddled with dangerous cracks and potholes, this money has been allocated to what has been described as a dud tunnel. Not only will this tunnel not solve the congestion problem of Melbourne's east-west, it is also an expensive dud. The tunnel will lead traffic straight into a traffic jam. Very few people travel from east to west in the inner city. They travel from the east to the city or they travel from the west to the city; rarely do they go across the city, which is why it is an expensive dud. The spending of the $8 billion on the tunnel will not benefit motorists in my electorate. That money could be spent on fixing vital infrastructure and bottlenecks in regional Victoria.

It is a waste of money that nobody wants, and it is one that the federal government should not be committing to—but they are. The Prime Minister said in The Age last September that he does not need to see the East West Link business case. The journalist went on to report that the government will hand over $1.5 billion to fund this tunnel without seeing the full business case. If there was one example that demonstrated that there is a need for greater transparency, it is this one. (Time expired)

See this speech in context