Alex Hawke (Mitchell, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It gives me great pleasure to rise tonight to speak on this very important motion before the House. The North West Rail Link represents perhaps the greatest single failing of any government policy, state or federal, in the last 50 years. When you examine what the New South Wales government has done about the north-west rail line over time, you see that it is the greatest breach of trust between a government and Australian voters that you could possibly imagine.

On 29 November 1998, three months prior to a state election, the New South Wales government promised $29 million for a link from Epping Station to Castle Hill. Since then, the government has re-announced the north-west rail line five times. On 9 June 2005, Bob Carr announced an $8 billion, 15-year Metropolitan Rail Extension Program. This announcement included the North West Rail Link, a new passenger line from Cheltenham to Rouse Hill via Castle Hill, with long-term plans to extend to the Vineyard and Richmond lines. On 20 November 2006, the government re-announced the completion of the north-west rail line by 2017—just seven short years away. The first stage, Epping to Hills Centre, would be completed by 2015—it would already almost be complete—and Hills Centre by 2017. Then the government announced the line in June 2007 with an extension from Rouse Hill to Vineyard Station on the Richmond line. Then the New South Wales state government abandoned all plans to build a north-west rail line.

Why do we need a rail line in north-west Sydney? Why is it a vital component of the social, environmental and economic infrastructure that north-west Sydney desperately needs? It is because the electorate of Mitchell has the highest rate of cars per household of any federal electorate in this country, because there are no available public transport options. You drive, and every adult in your household needs to have a car.

It is not just my electorate. Across the road there are similar difficulties in approaching employment, getting to the city or travelling across Sydney because of a failure of government to plan. We understand that governments can only do their best given the circumstances at the time they are put in, but the New South Wales state government has been in place for 16 years. It has been promised over six or seven times. The rail line has been cancelled, re-announced, cancelled, re-announced, cancelled, re-announced. This is the greatest single breach between a government and an electorate in Australian history. This is holding back the economic development of north-west Sydney. It is placing excessive financial burdens on residents, rate payers and people who have to travel by expensive motorways to and from their place of employment.

I quote some examples of people in my electorate going to work every day. This is based on a 48-week working year. Our motorists travelling to the city are now paying $16.90 a day, $84.50 a week, $338 a month, $4,056 a year just to go to work. I am a fan of tollways and motorways, building infrastructure through public-private partnerships—private motorways that will increase our capacity to get things done in Sydney. However, when you look at the litany of failure of the New South Wales government in these ventures, you see that they are giving public-private infrastructure partnerships a bad name in Sydney. We are losing investment in Sydney because of the failures of the Cross City Tunnel, the Lane Cove ventures and all of the things that are happening with the RTA shutting roads and receiving a payment from a company to force people to use a motorway—something that I think all members here would regard as unethical.

In the shadow of the Penrith by-election, we can see that people in New South Wales have woken up to what is happening in north-west Sydney. It is emblematic of a city that is in disarray because of failures of government planning. I note that the member for Parramatta is here. I know that she would be extremely upset at the New South Wales government for breaching its promise to build a Parramatta-Epping rail link. Growing up in Carlingford, I can record my own absolute dismay at the residents in Carlingford not having a line that goes from Parramatta to Epping. But this is about the north-west rail link. It has been talked about throughout the last 15 years. There is a vital need in Sydney for heavy rail lines in the north-west and south-west of Sydney—particularly the north-west—to meet the growth that government has allowed. Government has allowed massive expansion in the north-west of Sydney. It has encouraged it. It has taxed people for the privilege of living there. Special infrastructure levies have been paid. The money has been collected by government, but the state government of New South Wales has abrogated its responsibility. This federal government needs to allocate any money that it gave to New South Wales for a north-west rail line.

Julie Owens (Parramatta, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think I could be forgiven for thinking that the member for Mitchell is going to run for state parliament today, because we are of course talking once again about state issues. There is nobody who lives in north-west Sydney—or Parramatta, for that matter—who does not understand the need for the north-west rail line. I would be one of the first to say that it is essential, as in my area are the Parramatta-Chatswood line, the doubling of the Richmond line and the western metro.

We do have an extraordinary backlog of public transport rail infrastructure in the Sydney area and, as the member for Mitchell has said, it is a backlog that comes from 50 years of policy failure—many, many years. In fact, the Parramatta line was the first line built in New South Wales. It was built in September 1855. It was a long time ago. Many governments have come and gone since then, and since then we have had a single spur north and a single spur south. So many, many governments, extending long before the current one, have failed us in this area. I suspect that, given the nature of the backlog, which has built up over probably a hundred years, it will last long after the next state government. It is going to take a considerable amount of time for us to deal with that substantial public backlog. That is why I am really happy to see the Rudd government actually move decisively to engage in the policy area of cities and public transport. I remind the member for Mitchell that his claim that it is 50 years of policy failure on both state and federal levels applies very seriously to the Howard government, who spent nothing on public transport infrastructure during their 12 years in office.

And can I add to the list that I do not just want a north-west rail line and a Parramatta to Chatswood line and the doubling of the Richmond line and the building of the western Metro; I also want lifts at Wentworthville, Toogabbie and Pendle Hill, I want more trains to stop there and I want commuter parking. We have very, very real issues to deal with when it comes to public transport in Sydney and particularly Western Sydney. As for stunts where a member of federal parliament stands up and calls on the government to do something about it, can I suggest to the member for Mitchell that if he is really serious about this he can call on his own side to put their money where their mouth is. I am assuming he is telling us tonight that this is actually a policy of the opposition.

Alex Hawke (Mitchell, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Hawke interjecting

Julie Owens (Parramatta, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

He is running for state parliament again! He has just said that Barry O’Farrell is going to commit to it. If Barry O’Farrell is committing to it, why are you wasting the federal parliament’s time standing up here and asking for the government to do it?

Alex Hawke (Mitchell, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Hawke interjecting

Julie Owens (Parramatta, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I think I am getting the picture now: Barry O’Farrell is committing to it but not putting any money into it. I think that is what the member just said. Otherwise there is no explanation for why he is standing up in here wasting valuable time calling on the federal government to do something. If you believe that this is such a priority area, put your money where your mouth is and let us see this in the federal opposition policy. Let us see it costed. Let us see it funded. Let us see it there. That is what you should be doing. It is just a stunt. In my 5½ years here I can honestly say that I have not got up and called for something to happen if I did not think I could make it happen. I do not engage in fooling my electorate in that way. I really think you need to have a serious think about this. I know the press release will go out tomorrow: ‘I’m a good guy, I’m standing up for my community.’ Well, stand up for your community with Mr Abbott and put it in your own policy. There is an election coming up. This is your chance. Stand up tonight and call for yourself to do it.

Alex Hawke (Mitchell, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Yes, I will.

Julie Owens (Parramatta, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Good. I am glad to hear it, because it sounds like you will tick that one off and add it to the promises. At the moment it sounds like what we have is Barry O’Farrell promising something that he has no intention of delivering because there is no money. This is actually a really serious matter and it requires really serious action. In the last budget we allocated $4.5 billion to urban public transport. Again, that is $4.5 billion more in one year than the Howard government put up in 12. So a little bit of history would not hurt from the member for Mitchell. This is a serious matter. These stunts do not help at all. If you think it really is the most serious issue, put it up.

Louise Markus (Greenway, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Veterans' Affairs) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Sydney’s rail system has changed little since the designer of the Sydney Harbour Bridge, John Bradfield, first articulated his vision in the 1930s. Western Sydney’s population has increased fivefold since 1940 and its rail has extended only an extra 20 kilometres. Ron Christie was Coordinator-General of Rail when the New South Wales government asked him in 2001 to compose a long-term strategic plan, now called the Christie report. He warned that more than half of Sydney risked being without rail, creating and reinforcing significant inequalities. One of the proposals in the Christie report calls for an independent agency, Transport for Sydney, to be modelled on the successful Transport for London. Consecutive state Labor governments have neglected Greater Western Sydney and continue to promise and delay projects in line with the election cycle. It is not surprising therefore that many residents of Greater Western Sydney and the local government areas that encompass the Sydney region have completely lost faith in the ability of governments to deliver infrastructure in key parts of our state. It is for this reason that an independent agency such as the suggested Transport for Sydney is so important to delivering real transport and infrastructure results for people in our region.

Recently the state Labor government scrapped its bungled Sydney Metro plan, which has wasted $300 million already with zero result for the people of Greater Western Sydney who helped fund this bungled plan with their taxes. Under state Labor, work on a long-awaited express rail on the Richmond line would not even commence until 2015—20 years after Labor was first elected to government. Without even a commitment from Labor as to when work on the line would be finished, it could easily be up to 30 years before work is completed on the project and before Greater Western Sydney commuters have access to express train services.

People are already feeling the growing pains of increased population pressures. The Labor government’s consistent attitude of policy on the run means that there will be no time for adequate infrastructure planning as our population increases in order to ease congestion in our cities and to provide adequate and equitable transport options for those living on the outskirts. In areas such as the Hawkesbury and the Blue Mountains local people have no confidence that the Rudd Labor government will deliver the infrastructure required to support population growth. A Labor government who breaks their election promises, who cannot safely put insulation into roofs, who cannot build school halls and who flip-flop on major policy issues cannot be trusted to get this right.

The NRMA may have been outspoken in condemning the state Labor government’s failure to build infrastructure which can cope with Sydney’s growing population. They too acknowledge that, while commuters welcome the widening of the M2 freeway, people would still like to see more public transport so that they can leave their cars at home, helping the environment when they can. It needs to be noted that the M5 tunnel also opened at capacity and now the M2 requires expansion, an expansion that will increase costs for Greater Western Sydney commuters to an astronomical $22 per day once completed. Governments must plan for the future when implementing infrastructure and must keep in mind that the population of Sydney is growing. That is why the coalition’s plan for adequate and considered infrastructure in line with population growth is so important to the people living in Western Sydney.

The coalition is of the view that an efficient freight route from the west to the port is important to encourage economic growth outside the Sydney basin and that it is a piece of infrastructure which will be needed in the long term. Across Sydney, particularly in my area, protecting our way of life by reducing time stuck in traffic and enabling more time to be spent with family is critical. Spending two hours a day in a car to travel 50 kilometres is not a good use of time. We cannot undo the mistakes of years of poor planning overnight. We have to deal with current transport challenges now and learn lessons for the future. Planning for our roads and infrastructure does not simply mean bigger roads; it means improved road safety, integration with rail and other public transport and investing in new ways to move forward. (Time expired)

Roger Price (Chifley, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This has been a very interesting debate. I know the member for Parramatta and I were expecting a litany of projects in the 12 years of the coalition government and there was just one item listed—there was the M7! I regret to say the M7 was funded by $300 million only from the federal government and that resulted in the highest tolls in Sydney. Yet this was the project which had the best cost-benefit ratio of any infrastructure project in Australia. That was the only thing the coalition did—$7 dollars for the punters to use the tollway.

The member for Mitchell mentioned his passion for public-private partnerships, and I share that passion. He mentioned the Lane Cove Tunnel and also, I think, the Cross City Tunnel. I have been through those tunnels. I often travel from Western Sydney on the M7 and on the M2 into the city. They are fantastic infrastructure. I do not know what the whingers are all about. In Western Sydney we pay $7 to use the M7. Lane Cove Tunnel is a lot cheaper and so is the Cross City Tunnel. I congratulate the member for Mitchell on announcing that the coalition is now going to fully fund the rail infrastructure for north-western Sydney.

As a member from Western Sydney, I have to say that I have some sympathy. I support infrastructure projects for our region. But we are a federal government, and this federal government, in a short two years, has actually given $4.5 billion for rail projects. We are massively funding rail, road and port infrastructure, and we see the economic benefits of doing so. And how much was funded by the previous, Howard-Costello, government in rail and port infrastructure? I am sorry—zip!

I was a member of the Hawke-Keating government which actually had a Better Cities program, and it is a pity that the member for Greenway is not here because that funded the bus-rail interchange at Blacktown, a significant transport hub for north-western Sydney. The Richmond line comes into Blacktown then shoots off. We funded that bit of infrastructure. We also funded the new bus terminal at Mount Druitt. We funded a commuter car park and upgraded facilities at St Marys station. But what did the Howard government do—and I predict the coalition will do the same with our ambitious projects to improve infrastructure—the first time they got in? They got rid of the Better Cities program that was providing significant infrastructure improvements for public transport.

I do think that there is a case for more rail infrastructure in Western Sydney. By the way, the member for Parramatta reminded me that of course it was Gough Whitlam, not a coalition government, who actually, all those years ago, funded the quadrupling of the main Western Sydney line. Labor governments actually have a track record of investing in public infrastructure, and we will continue to do so. But I wonder—notwithstanding the promise by the member for Mitchell that the coalition will fully fund this bit of infrastructure—whether Labor’s massive infrastructure program of over $30 billion will see the light of day should Mr Abbott succeed at the next election. I would say they will be true to their form—they will axe the program. And, as far as the member for Mitchell is concerned, I think this rail system is still light years away if you have to depend on coalition governments.

Alby Schultz (Hume, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order! The time allotted for this debate has expired. The debate is adjourned and the resumption of the debate will be made an order of the day for the next sitting.