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

I thank all those members who have asked questions. I will try to deal with as many of them as I can, as quickly as I can. I do not know whether the Tasmanian member is coming back to hear the answer to her questions, but I do have answers. I might leave those till last then, in the hope that she might come back but if she does not I will still proceed with it.

The member for Bendigo raised a number of issues about, particularly, the Calder Highway-Ravenswood interchange. The total cost of that project is estimated at $86 million, of which the Commonwealth's contribution is $45 million, and $7 million of that has been allocated in the 2015-16 budget. In other words, there is money there ready for the project to proceed. While I know there has been a change of government in Victoria, I am optimistic that the state government will honour its commitment to its share of the project so it will be able to proceed. Now this is, of course, a bonus for the people in this region, because while Labor may have talked about it they actually did not include any funding for this project prior to the election. It was not in their list of projects to be funded. So the people in the electorate of Bendigo can be grateful that there is a coalition government that was elected and therefore is delivering on that particular project.

A number of the other road projects have been mentioned. While I have it in my mind, the member for Maranoa asked about the Warrego Highway. Yes, we have a major commitment to the Warrego Highway—not just the Toowoomba range project, which is probably the biggest project there has been in regional Australia on the roads, but also the Warrego Highway out to Miles. Something like $600 million is being committed there with the Commonwealth meeting 80 per cent of the cost.

You specifically asked about the Chinchilla to Toowoomba section—

Mr Bruce Scott interjecting—

Chinchilla to Dalby. Yesterday I was pleased to sign off on the project to upgrade Jingi Jingi Creek. Hopefully, the member will have a nice announcement to make about that in the next few days, but there is also work proposed around Brigalow-Chinchilla, the Dalby western access, the Dalby eastern access and, of course, more passing lanes—particularly between Oakey and Dalby—as well as an upgrade of the Acland intersection and the Toowoomba duplication. We have already started work on another 5.6 kilometres of duplication between Toowoomba and Oakey. This is a major work site, and I recognise the heavy volumes of traffic—there are black soil plains and some very difficult areas to build roads—but this should make a real difference in that particular area.

The member also asked about the Eight Mile intersection, and $550,000 has been provided by the Queensland government to develop a business case for that proposal. We expect that we will receive that sometime next year, and then there will be an opportunity for discussions to occur about what timeframe there might be for construction of that project.

The honourable member for Page spoke about the Pacific Highway, and obviously we have made major investments in the Pacific Highway. Our $5.6 billion is completely delivered in this year's budget and it will mean the project can be completed this decade, as we have promised. Because we are committed to an 80-20 funding mix, the project will proceed. Labor was demanding a 50-50 funding mix and, as a result, it would have been at least another decade before the project was completed. So the Pacific Highway is happening because there is a government that is determined to fund it. As the honourable member mentioned, the major final contract, the broad overview contract, was let and announced in his electorate just a few weeks ago.

I will go to the Western Australian issues. Yes, the government is committed to the Perth Freight Link. It is, I think, an important project. I do not think the Fremantle port is likely to close any time soon. In fact, it is going to be a vital piece of Perth infrastructure for a very, very long time. (Extension of time granted)

The reality is that the freedom of information rules are not ours. In fact, the legislation was introduced by the previous government. So the criteria for the release of information and the fee scale were absolutely the responsibility of the previous government.

Ms MacTiernan interjecting—

The other point I would make in response to the minister is that I do not make the decision. Under the law, each department is required to have a decision maker appointed and they make their decisions. I just get a brief from the officer telling me what he has done. The reality is, therefore, that they make the decisions on the basis of judgement. They certainly talk to the states on an issue like this one, because some of the documents involved are in relation to negotiations and discussions with the state. So those kinds of sensitivities are inevitable. Also, a project of this magnitude is going to have commercial issues which should not be in the public domain. So the reality is we are simply administering the laws as they were. I had no personal involvement in the decision. I did not seek to amend it in any way. The information conveyed to the honourable member about the fee scale and about the process is exactly as it was put in place by the previous government.

Her comments in relation to urban rail are simply nonsense. I know that the shadow minister has been saying this sort of thing—that we will not spend money on urban rail. That is complete rubbish. If you look at the projects that have been announced under the asset recycling program, most of them are urban rail, including a project right here in Canberra and some major projects in Sydney. Western Australia has not joined that program yet, but they are of a mind to do so. If they want to put up an urban rail project, I am sure it will be carefully considered by the Treasurer and, on its merits, would be funded.

In addition to that, we are talking to Melbourne, Victoria about their decision to axe the most important project in Melbourne, about where the money might be spent. They are in fact privatising and selling the Port of Melbourne and will certainly be eligible for the asset recycling program if they want to.

In Queensland we had indicated to the previous Newman government that we were happy to support the BaT tunnel in Brisbane. The new government is walking away from that because it does not want to engage in the asset recycling program. But there is no evidence to support a claim that we are not backing urban rail; we are. We are spending significant amounts of money on urban rail and we expect to do that in the future.

Our primary responsibility is obviously to the interstate freight link, and that is where we will be investing significant funds—in things like the Melbourne to Brisbane railway line—but we are spending money on rail systems that will make a difference to urban public transport. I add that a very important part of urban public transport is buses, and buses drive on roads. So we have been building those roads, which otherwise would never have happened. I am more than happy to stand on our record in relation to these issues.

Moving on to the Tasmanian issues—and someone might like to convey this information to the honourable member for Franklin—yes, we have proposed a new, more generous subsidy to the Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme. It will provide funding for exports. It is a flat amount because, when you are sending something on an export ship from Tasmania, clearly, it is a less complex arrangement, and so the fees are different.

Currently, people have two years to make a claim under this scheme. Frankly, we think six months is reasonable. Surely, you can get around to making your claim in six months. When people are so far behind in lodging accounts, the ability to trace and effectively document the trail is all the more difficult. However, we are having consultations about the proposed guidelines at present. If this is an issue for people in Tasmania, I would encourage them to make their views known. Submissions close on 24 June. If it is a major issue, we are certainly prepared to have a look at how best it can be addressed. I will only be another few seconds, Mr Deputy Speaker Irons.

Ms MacTiernan interjecting—

See this speech in context