Paul Neville (Hinkler, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

On behalf of the Standing Committee on Transport and Regional Services, I present the committee’s report entitled The great freight task: is Australia’s transport network up to the challenge?, together with the minutes of proceedings.

Ordered that the report be made a parliamentary paper.

For just over two years, the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Transport and Regional Services conducted an inquiry into the integration of regional road and rail networks and their interface with ports. This inquiry is now finished and today I am tabling our final report: The great freight task: is Australia’s transport network up to the challenge?

During the inquiry, the committee received a tremendous quantity of information from governments, local authorities, businesses, industry associations and individuals. That information was supplemented by numerous reports on various aspects of the freight transport task. It seemed at one stage that a new report was being released every few weeks.

Our inquiry received 194 submissions, held 30 public hearings and carried out a large number of inspections. I would like to take this opportunity to thank all those who made submissions or gave evidence to the committee at the hearings, and those who gave their time and hospitality as we went on inspection tours.

This inquiry arose out of concerns about long queues of coal ships off our ports awaiting the availability of cargoes, a problem that is occurring even as I speak. It is a potent image of lost opportunity.

The committee found that infrastructure problems are widespread. It found a pattern of infrastructure difficulties in the access to and operation of our major ports. There were missing supply links, a lack of rail capacity, a need for bypass or ring roads, and bottlenecks that needed an overpass or a rail loop to overcome the traffic congestion.

Perhaps one example illustrates this. The Lascelles terminal in Melbourne moves over one million tonnes of dry bulk products a year. At present, it has no rail connections to service its wharf storage, handling and ship berthing facilities. A rail line would enable the terminal to rail its products directly to and from the main freight network.

In many of the ports, the functionality of the access channels is threatened by the trend towards using larger and larger freight carriers. The need for deeper channels is a growing problem, especially in Melbourne, Australia’s biggest container port. Other ports need wider channels or separate passing channels to overcome their difficulties.

In a recent paper, the Bureau of Transport and Regional Economics estimated that total containerised trade would increase from 5.2 million containers in 2004-05 to approximately 14.9 million in 2024-25, an increase of 5.4 per cent a year, a staggering figure. This illustrates the need for our ports to be able to handle the bigger vessels that are now becoming the norm for containerised trade. Equally, land based infrastructure and access routes must keep pace in order to service these larger vessels. For a country so dependent on maritime activity, to neglect this will be at Australia’s economic peril.

The committee also noted a decline in the use of Australia’s coastal shipping fleet, a trend that is disturbing in view of the rapidly growing freight task and the congestion of our road and rail systems. The Chair of the International Commission on Shipping said:

For the largest island continent in the world to be determining a land transport strategy to the exclusion of its own interstate shipping services, is irresponsible.

The importance of intermodal terminals was highlighted by evidence considered at the inquiry. The committee was surprised to find, however, that rather than an emphasis on regional terminals—as the members expected—there was a need for city terminals in the major capital city basins. The North-South Rail Corridor Study, commissioned by DOTARS, made the comment:

If key intermodal facilities are not operating efficiently, this would actually negate gains made by improving infrastructure along the corridor.

Cross-border and near-border infrastructure commitments—or the lack of them—are of great concern to the committee. The Commonwealth has focused on new cross-border modalities for water, and transport infrastructure must be treated in a similar fashion.

Finally, I would like to thank the secretariat staff. Secretaries Ian Dundas and, more recently, Janet Holmes played leadership roles, while Tas Luttrell and his team carried out a remarkable two-year commitment. Researchers Courtney Krauss and Samantha Mannette deserve our praise. I have much pleasure in tabling this report.

Sharon Bird (Cunningham, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I commend to the House the report of the Standing Committee on Transport and Regional Services entitled The great freight task: is Australia’s transport network up to the challenge? The report presented today is the result of 2½ years of work by the committee. I would like to put on the record my sincere appreciation of the chair and my fellow committee members for their professional and sincere approach to this inquiry and the writing of the report, an approach which has led to its bipartisan support.

The report is also significantly the result of the tremendous dedication and efforts of the committee secretariat, and I particularly acknowledge the work of the principal research officer, Tas Luttrell, and the senior research officer, Samantha Mannette. I would also like to thank and note the contribution of the previous committee secretary, Ian Dundas, the administration officer, Marlene Dundas, as well as Janet Holmes and Jazmine De Roza.

The report includes recommendations across a wide range of aspects aimed at meeting the challenge of the doubling of the freight task by 2020 and the need to expand the role of rail in that task. I am particularly pleased that the report recommends that a critical port infrastructure fund be established to urgently provide funding for the construction of vital projects of up to $150 million.

One such vital project that may take advantage of the recommended fund is the missing transport link in Wollongong, known as the Maldon-Dombarton rail link. The link has been on the infrastructure agenda for many years; in fact, it is nearly half-completed. For 20 years, the link has sat there mothballed. Since I was first elected in 2004, I have been determined to put the project back on the agenda. Some in Wollongong thought I was mad to propose it. But I am happy to report that the pessimistic view has altered significantly in the last 12 months. The committee’s visit to Wollongong, as part of this inquiry, was a contributing factor to that changed view.

The biggest development to encourage the completion of Wollongong’s missing freight link is, of course, the New South Wales government’s $140 million investment in the expansion of the port of Port Kembla. Wollongong needs to expand this regional asset and, while existing road and rail infrastructure is able to cope with the planned expanded use of the port, this will not be the case for future expansions. The additional benefit of completing the Maldon-Dombarton link is the connection to south-west Sydney, a growing manufacturing and export market. My colleague the honourable member for Werriwa has spoken about this and I am pleased that he acknowledges the strategic link and supports the completion of the project. The completion of the Maldon-Dombarton project would provide an essential link from south-west Sydney to the port of Port Kembla. No longer would freight need to face a curfew and the additional cost penalty involved in using the existing line.

I am very pleased that the views of major industry have changed in Wollongong with regard to the Maldon-Dombarton link. The coal industry and Port Kembla Coal Terminal made significant submissions to the inquiry. However, the case for completing the link no longer relies exclusively on coal. The expansion of the port of Port Kembla changes the business case. That has been my argument. The New South Wales government, to its credit, has invested substantially in the expansion of Wollongong’s port asset, but the Commonwealth has not to date. AusLink 1 left the Illawarra out in the cold. It is time the Commonwealth made a contribution to the economic diversity of Wollongong. I believe this report provides a sound business basis upon which to do that.

I recognise the long advocacy and support of the Maldon-Dombarton project by Associate Professor Philip Laird, of the University of Wollongong. Professor Laird is well known to the committee and a passionate advocate of the importance of rail in the freight task for a very long time. This 35 kilometres of half-completed track needs to be completed. It will fit well with the committee’s recommendations. I urge the Commonwealth to adopt the committee’s recommendations and, in particular, recommendations 5, 6 and 7. Finally, I thank all the participants across the country—including people from Wollongong—who provided written and verbal submissions with such great enthusiasm to the committee. I believe we have returned their confidence and trust with this comprehensive and significant report. I commend the report to the House.

Ian Causley (Page, Deputy-Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The time allotted for statements on this report has expired. Does the member for Hinkler wish to move a motion in connection with the report to enable it to be debated on a later occasion?

David Hawker (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I move:

That the House take note of the report.

In accordance with standing order 39, the debate is adjourned. The resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for a later hour this day.