Bert Van Manen (Forde, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's a pleasure to rise and speak on the High Speed Rail Authority Bill 2022. As we look around this great country of ours, we see an enormous history of rail right across the country that has led to, and facilitated, the development of our country over the past couple of hundred years. I think the importance of rail today is no less diminished than it has been historically and, sadly, I think that over the years we've under-appreciated the value and importance of our rail systems right across this country, particularly in our urban areas. If I look back, historically, in South-East Queensland we used to have a rail line to Southport on the Gold Coast, and that was ripped up at one stage and then we had to build a whole new line. As the member for Bowman would know, there was a line to Cleveland that terminated at Wyndham which was ripped up and which has had to be rebuilt. And the member for Bonner would well know that as well, given that it goes through his part of the world. If I have a look now at the Gold Coast line, I look at the capacity constraints that are on that. In the western part of my electorate, I look at the massive developments going on in the south-west of Logan, at Flagstone and Yarrabilba—two priority development areas that were foisted on the City of Logan by the state government but with no provision or planning for public transport infrastructure.

I'm pleased to say that, when we were in government we committed some $10 million, in partnership with the state government, who put in another $10 million—so, a total of $20 million—to another study on passenger rail in the Salisbury-to-Beaudesert corridor, which would service the west of my electorate and those two key priority development areas I just mentioned, which are in the electorate of my colleague the member for Wright. I also remember having significant discussions with the then minister around the importance of inland rail, and the importance that inland rail doesn't cannibalise that existing corridor so we can put passenger rail in it.

As I look at this bill to create the High Speed Rail Authority, it reminds me of when I first came to this place and the work that the now Prime Minister was doing—when he was Minister for Infrastructure and Transport in the former Rudd-Gillard-Rudd governments—on a high-speed rail study which, in large part, identified a corridor from Brisbane to Melbourne. A number of pieces of work have been done subsequently over the years, trying to quantify the cost of such a rail system, and one of the latest figures I've seen is in the order of $140 billion. It does beg the question: how is that going to be funded? Is this another statutory body that does an enormous amount of what I think is good work? I see the minister is in the House. I believe that the purpose of this High Speed Rail Authority is first and foremost to look at a government commitment for high-speed rail between Newcastle and Sydney, which we know is a corridor that is growing enormously, the same as the south-east of Queensland is growing enormously. But the amount of money that is being provided for that—$500 million—is not even close to what would be required to facilitate that project.

If I have a look back in my home state of Queensland—and we have the member for Fisher here in the House. To the west of his electorate, he has the north coastline that runs from Brisbane all the way up to Cairns. As he would well know, one of the services that runs on that is the Tilt Train, and that is presently recognised as the fastest passenger rail train in Australia.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

God help us!

Bert Van Manen (Forde, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'll get to that! One of the reasons it can't run at its identified top speed is because of the quality of the rail line and, more particularly, the alignment of the rail line. What would be necessary to achieve the maximum speeds that the train is known to be able to run at would involve some significant upgrades to alignments on that line. It is one of the reasons we announced, when we were in government, the national Faster Rail Plan in 2019. One of the commitments in that was for $1.6 billion for the Brisbane-to-Sunshine-Coast extension, and a further $1.2 billion for the Brisbane-to-Gold-Coast rail upgrade, which is of particular interest to me through the upgrade of the corridor between Kuraby and Beenleigh. I'm not sure where that is in terms of funding in the budget because I—

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

It's still in the budget.

Bert Van Manen (Forde, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Thank you, Minister. I appreciate that that is contained in the budget. But if you have a look at what is required to achieve the outcomes that are sought for that project, it requires significant realignment and re-engineering of the existing corridor. In order to achieve capacity for higher speeds in our trains, the radius of the curves need to be far flatter. You can't have tight curves—that impacts the speed outcomes for the trains. That comes at an enormous cost, because a large number of resumptions are required along that corridor because it's highly developed. The corridor south of Beenleigh to the Gold Coast is relatively straightforward. It's pretty straight, so the trains can travel at or near their maximum speed.

Looking at that corridor between Newcastle and Sydney, I thank the same issue applies as the issue I raised with the Brisbane line north to Rockhampton on which the Tilt Train runs. I would argue that there is much work that could be done on that corridor in terms of straightening alignments and improving the existing alignment. That can significantly increase the speeds. It would be interesting to see what the cost of that would be, ultimately. I know that when we were in government we committed $1 billion to that potential upgrade.

I would argue that rail is critically important and will remain critically important. It goes an enormous way to reducing congestion on our roads, because we know that trains are the most efficient way to move large numbers of people quickly. So the question becomes how, through high-speed rail or even faster rail, we achieve those efficiencies and ensure—given the costs involved today in building these pieces of infrastructure, as we are seeing with the cost of Inland Rail—that the cost of tickets on those trains is affordable for commuters to use them on a regular basis to commute to and from work and other places.

I support the creation of this High-Speed Rail Authority. As I said, there has been much work done over the years. I would not like to see it become another government body that does an enormous amount of good work, as I said earlier, but doesn't achieve any practical outcomes at the end of the day, where we don't see the delivery of, at least as a starting point, faster rail in our capital cities and in our large urban areas—as opposed to high-speed rail, because there is a significant step up and differential cost between fast rail and high-speed rail. I think that if we can achieve high-quality fast rail, in the first instance, to improve the quality and timeliness of our existing services, then ultimately, maybe, at some point down the track, that leads us to introduce high-speed rail.

As I've said, I'm pleased to see that the government is building on the enormous amount of work we did in the rail space when we were in government, and I'm sure that as an opposition we'll continue to work with the government to see these outcomes realised.

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Firstly, I just want to acknowledge the presence of the minister in the chamber this afternoon. I've been fighting for heavy passenger rail to come into the Sunshine Coast since I was elected to this place in 2016. I should say also that the member for Fairfax and I have been working assiduously on this. When the Sunshine Coast was first developed over a hundred years ago, people settled inland, in what is now the hinterland. The rail line was built in the hinterland. That rail line is now well over a hundred years old. From Beerburrum, it is only a single track going north, and it's interesting that that same single track going north—I want to acknowledge the former minister for infrastructure and cities, who has just walked into the chamber and who the member for Fairfax and I worked very closely with when we were in government.

The people of the Sunshine Coast have been absolutely screaming out for this project. We are the ninth-largest city in the country. We are growing exponentially. When I move around the electorate, as I often do, and hold my listening posts, infrastructure, road and rail are very constant issues that are brought up by my electorate, because at the moment there is no rail actually on the coast, unlike, say on the Gold Coast. If someone who lives on the Sunshine Coast, right on the coast, wants to jump on the train and go to Brisbane, they have to travel more than 25 minutes inland to catch a train. Over 100 years ago, that's where the settlement was. Nobody wanted to live on the coast. Everyone wanted to live in the hinterland. That's obviously changed, and we've got more than 80 per cent of our population living on the coast rather than in the hinterland, so there is a misalignment there with public transport.

One of the major problems that we have in my electorate is the lack of public transport. I also want to acknowledge the member for Fairfax, who's just walked into the chamber. It seems that everybody who's had something to do with this project is in the chamber. You know what they say: success has many parents, and failure is an orphan. But I do want to acknowledge the member for Fairfax and the work that he has done, and, of course, I acknowledge the former infrastructure minister. But do you know what? I'm going to give credit where credit is due, because the current infrastructure minister—and I hope she's not the current infrastructure minister for too long; no offence, Minister, but we'll be doing everything we can to take the job off you—has retained the $1.6 billion that the former infrastructure minister worked so hard with the Treasurer and the Prime Minister to get in the budget.

I think that for as long as I am on my two feet I'll remember where I was. I was actually having a shave, and I had a phone call from the former infrastructure minister. There I am, looking in the mirror and having a shave, and he says, 'Congratulations, Andrew: you've just got $1.6 billion in the March budget.' I think I cut myself at that point when he said that, and I said, 'Paul, did you say "billion" with a b? ' and he said, 'Andrew, that's "billion" with a b.' I knew that our hard work with the member for Fairfax had paid off, and I want to thank him and thank all those who were involved in that project, because this is a project that has been such a long time in the making.

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Katter's Australian Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Did you get anything built?

Andrew Wallace (Fisher, Liberal National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

This is a project that has been such a long time in the making. I'll take the interjection as to whether we got anything built, because that decision was made in March of this year. For a $3.2 billion project, the member would know that these things don't happen overnight, even as the minister told ABC FM just yesterday. But this is great news for the Sunshine Coast. Whilst I'm as crook as a dog right now, I am very, very excited about this project.

But the battle's not over. There's more work to be done. Whilst the Labor government has recommitted itself to the coalition's $1.6 billion in funding, we know that our initial costings for this project were around $2.9 billion. From a cost escalation perspective, we rounded that up to $3.2 billion. The coalition put $1.6 billion on the table when we were in government, and the Labor government has now committed to that, and I thank the minister for doing so. I have to admit, Minister, there were a couple of hairy moments there when I looked through the budget on budget night. I got to page 160 and couldn't see it there. You had me going for a while. I was pretty worried. I think there are a lot of people, journalists included, who were concerned that it had been taken out, but I am very, very pleased that the government has committed to it.

But we have a sticking point, and the sticking point is this: when we were in government, the state Labor Queensland government, who really is responsible for this project—when you look at a train, you don't see 'Commonwealth Rail' on the front of it; you see 'Queensland Rail'. Queensland Rail is responsible for this project. The Queensland government is responsible for it, but we stumped up 50 per cent of the cost. But to this day, Queensland Labor has been absolutely mute on whether the current Queensland government is going to match our funding. This is absolutely inexcusable. The two local state members for the Labor Party that are in the Labor government have been absolutely absent on this issue. Whilst the member for Fairfax and I have been banging on every door, arguing for this case publicly, doing petitions and listening posts, driving awareness of this program and, quite frankly, putting pressure on our own government when we were in government and, as you would expect, putting pressure on the new Labor government to keep that funding there, I have not heard boo from either of those state Labor members. Nothing.

The people of the Sunshine Coast elect their representatives to be their voices, and they are not seeing this. Consequently, what we've seen from the Labor state government is total inaction. Come October 2024, I think the people of the Sunshine Coast, particularly in the state seat of Caloundra and the state seat of Nicklin, will have a few things to say about this. So I would encourage very strongly that those two state members get on Mark Bailey's back—Mark Bailey being the state Minister for Transport and Main Roads. The ball is fairly and squarely in the Labor state government's court.

There is now a bipartisan approach in relation to the funding of this project at a federal level. But because of state Labor's inaction on this point, how much extra is it going to cost us as a country and as a state to deliver this project? Bear in mind that we don't have a lot of time. Due to the fantastic work of the member for Fairfax when he was the PM's envoy for the Olympics and the Paralympics, we've secured those games. We know that in 2032 we are going to get an explosion of people coming to the Sunshine Coast. We are host to all sorts of games and events. Now that there is a bipartisan approach at a federal level to build this, it would be absolutely inexcusable, absolutely untenable, for the state to hold out. Does the state seriously think now that they have any cover? They have no cover. It's time for them to stump up and put up this $1.6 billion that they must commit to this project.

Turning to the bill, I want to say that I think this bill is a good thing. This bill is a good thing. I support high-speed rail. I support the establishment of an authority. I encourage the minister, to the extent that she can, when she is in discussions with Mark Bailey, to have in mind our project, the Sunshine Coast rail project, from Beerwah, Caloundra, Kawana, all the way through to the city centre in Maroochydore. Nothing less is viable; nothing less will be accepted. I encourage the minister, to the extent she can, that the design of that part of the works should be done as a high-speed project. We have a corridor that has been set aside. Very few resumptions will be required to be undertaken. The corridor was put in place 20 years ago, so it's effectively ready to go, unlike other parts of the main line, the existing line—parts around Eudlo that are like a snake because of twisting etc. The CAMCOS corridor is a relatively straight stretch of line. I encourage the minister, when she's speaking to the Queensland minister, that this section should at least be designed to be capable of carrying fast or faster rail. This is important because the speed at which the current train operates on the existing line, Minister, is 56 kilometres an hour, as an average. As I understand that that is slower than the trains used to travel when they were coal-fired locomotives.

The time has come for faster rail to the Sunshine Coast. This project will absolutely put pay to what the local council wants to do, which is to put in light rail between Caloundra and Maroochydore, not connected to Brisbane. That's what the council wants to do, but almost every one of my constituents I talk to are against light rail. When the minister was speaking to ABC Coast FM—this is not a criticism—she actually let slip and talked about light rail. I assume that was a slip of the tongue; I think it was. There is absolutely no support for light rail on the Sunshine Coast amongst my constituents and the constituents of Fairfax.

This is a great project. It's a project that we can all be very, very proud of on both sides of the House. I want to acknowledge in particular the work done by the member for Fairfax. I want to acknowledge the former minister for infrastructure and cities. If you had not had stumped up and listened to our pleas, we really wouldn't be here today and there wouldn't be pressure on the existing government to deliver the project. From the bottom of my heart, on behalf of all the members and people in Fisher and Fairfax, thank you so much.

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Katter's Australian Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Speaking to this, it's not so much what this does; it's the things that don't get done because this is being done. There is a fundamental difference, a world of difference, between a make-money project and an absorb-money project. I'm not denying that a ring road around Melbourne would be a good thing to happen, or a super highway and a second airport in Sydney wouldn't be good to happen. I'm not denying that what the previous speaker said wouldn't be a good thing to happen. But is this a make-money project or an absorb-money project? I would say it's a classic absorb-money project. I do not know of a single industry that will be helped or promoted by the construction of this railway line, not a single one.

I can give you a thousand examples of make-money projects. Queensland was a Cinderella state with a very, very tiny economy, an economy much smaller than South Australia's, and the making of that economy was the use of government money on make-money projects. If anyone has listened to the wonderful address by Sir Leo Hielscher—two of the four biggest bridges in Australia are quite rightly named the Sir Leo Hielscher Bridges after one of the great architects of the economic miracle which is Queensland—they will know that Queensland had no coal industry; it had a negligible copper industry; it had no aluminium industry; it was the fourth-smallest state in cattle population; it was a Cinderella state. The government built the railway line from Gladstone to nowheresville—to a post-office box on the side of the road by a station called Blackwater. A little post-office box with Blackwater written on it—that's where the railway line went! This was a make-money project. The income created by that railway line now amounts to some $50 billion a year. For an outlay of $1 billion, we get $50 billion a year for 50 years.

That has not happened in this place since I've been in here. If there is a significant make-money project that has occurred, I haven't seen it. I don't wish to denigrate the past Prime Minister—he's a friend of mine; I like him—on the building of the NBN, because I think the building of the NBN is a wonderful thing, but it's not a make-money project. There's a fundamental difference between building a railway line to Mount Isa so you can open up the biggest mineral province in the world and building a railway line to the Gold Coast. It's great for the Gold Coast people. I'm pleased for them. Good on you. But does it make money? No. It will absorb money forever. No-one would remotely expect it to pay for itself. All commuter lines are subsidised. I've never denied the right of city people to have their commuter lines subsidised, but the development of the country is being sacrificed.

I deeply regret that the minister has left the parliament, because I've had discussions with her this week on a tunnel through the range to open up the giant mineral province between Georgetown and Chillagoe. We talk about new minerals; it is the home of the new age minerals—the nickel, the cobalt, the copper, the cadmium. The home of those metals is in the Georgetown mineral fields stretching across to Chillagoe. They're all behind Cairns, but we can't get them out. We can't have a port in the gulf. It's all just flood plain in the gulf, with very shallow water, so you can't go to the gulf, and Townsville is a 2½-thousand-kilometre round trip away, but Cairns is a few hundred kilometres away. In the case of the Chillagoe field, it's less than 100km away. But we can't open it up. It was much bigger than the North West Minerals Province for nearly 100 years, but we can't open it up because we can't get the product out.

Corruption built the first railway line to Mount Isa, and I'm ashamed to admit I was then in the government—no, I wasn't, actually, but I was soon afterwards. And corruption built the second railway line to Mount Isa, when we had to duplicate it. It seems to me the only way we ever get anything of value done in the state of Queensland might be by going down the corruption trail! Whether that's true or whether that's not, the fact is that that railway line to Mount Isa cost a thousand million dollars and produces for the economy of Australia some $6 billion or $7 billion every single year. That's a make-money project as opposed to an absorb-money project.

I'm speaking against this project because if I have a choice on spending the money it's for digging a lousy little one-kilometre or two-kilometre tunnel through that range to open up that giant mineral province stretching from Mareeba right across to Georgetown, almost to the Gulf of Carpentaria and below. To open it up, we need the tunnel. Now, that's a make-money project. Every single year there would be money pouring into the coffers of the government through tax revenue, whether it's PAYE tax or whether it's company tax or whatever the hell it is.

The other thing is that I very strongly support the Greens amendment on this, because, if there is any possibility of Australia getting any monetary benefit out of this, it goes if it's not in Australia. All of our savings in Australia—and I don't think many people in this place understand this—go into superannuation. Up until 1995, 60 per cent of the superannuation moneys went into government securities, as they should. We want some sort of guarantee that the money is going to be there when we arrive at retirement age—and I'm a bit more concerned about this than other people here are, of course. Is that money going to be there? Where's the money going now? Ten per cent of Australia's income is going into the superannuation funds and, from there, it goes into speculation. It all goes into the stock market—buying and selling shares to each other, a giant Ponzi scheme. I very much share the views here of the Greens party and the other people on the crossbench. We seem to be the only people who are worried about it. Well, there are going to be a lot of people worried about it when they retire and they work out who's to blame. And I'll tell you who's to blame: people on my right, people on my left, but not the people behind me—not us.

Twenty years ago there was $70 billion going into the share market. There is now $1,700 billion going into the share market, almost every cent of it coming from your savings and my savings and every other Australians' savings. John Maynard Keynes was quoted recently by our past prime minister Kevin Rudd. Let me quote John Maynard Keynes, who may be the greatest economist in human history; he is most certainly one of the three greatest economists in human history. He described the stock market as a roulette wheel. Well, I'd describe it as a Ponzi scheme, but I'm not going to argue with you if you want to call it a roulette wheel. You tell me that some silly little young kid has slithered out of Sydney University into a union office and then slithered out of that into a superannuation board and that he knows whether we should develop the Cainozoic intrusion formation, calcitic formation, or whether we shouldn't. And, if you didn't understand what I just said—and I'm sure you don't—don't invest a cent in mining. There wouldn't be one single person on a superannuation board in Australia that would know what the hell I was talking about—not one.

What we're talking about here is putting billions of dollars into self-gratification. We have a saying in the bush: you can spend it on air-conditioning the living room or you can spend it on watering the bottom paddock. If you've got no water in the bottom paddock, you can't run any cattle there. If you put water in the paddock, you suddenly turn it into a productive resource. So you can spend it on self-indulgence, or you can spend it on development. It's whether you want to spend it on your own luxury or whether you want to give a future for your great-grandkids. That's really the decision being made here.

Well, in the last 30 years that I have been in this place, I am not aware of there having been a single developmental policy. If you lived in Cairns, you would understand the absolute necessity for digging that 1½-kilometre tunnel through a range to open up the giant, vast mineral field. We congratulate the government on giving us $210 million for the development of the new age minerals which stretch from Chillagoe through Georgetown, all the way down to Julia Creek, Cloncurry—my homeland—and Mount Isa, and it's called the North West Minerals Province. The vanadium deposits north of Julia Creek, Richmond and Hughenden stretch 200 kilometres west and then 500 kilometres south, all the way down through Winton, into the Northern Territory. They're the biggest vanadium deposits in the world. What are the new batteries made of? Vanadium. You've got one of the most red-hot minerals in existence there.

We've also got it up in the northern end, but we can't get it out. We've got no railway line and we've got no highway. We've got a little bush track—a beautiful bush track called the Kuranda Range road—and the government is putting $200 million into that. I don't criticise the federal government, because they're obviously doing it on the advice of the state government, and of course the state government is entirely based in Brisbane, nearly 3,000 kilometres away from Cairns. Half a million people live in the greater Cairns region, but we might as well be on the moon. 'The road needs fixing up, so we'll just give $200 million for the road.' The road doesn't need fixing up. Maybe the greatest minerals province on earth needs to be opened up. You keep talking about new-age minerals, well, where are they? They are almost exclusively in that zone.

The federal government, God bless them, have acknowledged that the new-age minerals are in that zone between Mount Isa and Chillagoe and Mareeba, right across North Queensland. That's where they are, but in the top half we can't get them out. In the bottom half we can go back on the railway line, which was built on corruption, as I say, the first time. And it was built on corruption the second time. The only way we could get it built was to give a $200,000 gift to each of the cabinet ministers. We had to do that in the 1920s and we had to do it again in the 1970s. Maybe it's a good form of government. I don't know. At least it gets things done.

But further north we have the situation where, with half of that mineral field, we cannot get the product out. Minister, unless we get a tunnel through the range, there is no way we can get it out. We can't go to the gulf. It is all flood plain. It's supershallow water. They tried to do that, and the boat turned over, and they lost $25 million worth. It's very, very cyclone prone as well. No-one would ever think of getting it out through the Gulf of Carpentaria. You can go to Townsville, but that would require pretty close to a 3,000-kilometre round trip—most certainly an over-2,000-kilometre round trip—by road. It's just not going to happen. No one's going to cart ore on a 2,000-kilometre round trip by road transport.

So half of the mineral field can't be opened up unless we get a tunnel through the range. A tunnel through the range would be like a tunnel from one side of Parliament House to the other side. That's a kilometre. I think we need a kilometre and a half, and no-one is arguing against me on that. We need a kilometre-and-a-half tunnel, and then we can open up the mineral province. There were people arguing in Brisbane about building that railway line, and they decided not to till they all got $200,000 put in their pocket. Every single cabinet minister took $200,000 in the 1920s. (Time expired)

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the government's High Speed Rail Authority Bill 2022. Let's be clear that this is a bill that does nothing to deliver even one kilometre of high-speed rail. In the tech sector, they call this 'vapourware'—something you announce when you have nothing substantive. Purportedly this bill establishes a High Speed Rail Authority as an independent body to advise on, plan and develop a high-speed rail system in Australia. But there is already the National Faster Rail Agency, established several years ago, with a significant body of work completed and substantial funding commitments made, as I will come back to and as the member for Fisher was referring to—because, of course, one of the projects that was developed through work by the National Faster Rail Agency was the line to the Sunshine Coast that he was speaking about.

Let's be clear, everybody loves high-speed rail. But, let us be honest, the economics of high-speed rail in Australia, normally understood to be speeds of 200 kilometres an hour, or more, are extremely challenging. How do we know that? Well, for one thing, from a study commissioned by the now Prime Minister when he was minister for infrastructure, which was conducted from 2010 to 2013. This study was not particularly glowing in it's findings. Indeed, at the time, he had this to say, referring to high-speed rail:

The reality … has a wide corridor, major tunnelling, significant noise impacts and that's before we consider the significant economic costs.

This study remains the most comprehensive analysis of the feasibility of high-speed rail in Australia, and it was undertaken from 2010 to 2013. The cost at that time was estimated to be $114 billion, in 2012 numbers, and this equates to approximately $131 billion, in current numbers, taking into account inflation. There have not been any more-detailed costings done since this time, but most credible rail experts consider that the real cost for high-speed rail from Melbourne to Brisbane would be at least $200 billion to $300 billion. Notably, while the study done from 2010 to 2013 found that, on certain, rather heroic, assumptions, high-speed rail would cover its operating costs. It would produce a return only if you assumed away the capital cost. That's a huge assumption. In other words, it's a hopelessly uneconomic project.

Another thing that the study said at the time was that operations would not commence on the Newcastle to Sydney part of the line until 2040. Almost 10 years later, that translates to 2050. It's interesting, to say the least, that the now Prime Minister made no mention of this fact when he made an announcement about Sydney to Newcastle fast rail in January this year, before the election. No mention of the fact that a study he had commissioned about high-speed rail when he last had ministerial responsibility said that, if the project started at that time it would be 2040 before operations Newcastle to Sydney would commence, meaning today it would be 2050. He was completely silent about that fact when, with a big song and dance, he made an announcement early in January in Newcastle, promising $500 million.

The fact is that the current Prime Minister had six years as minister for infrastructure to get moving on high-speed rail, should he have chosen to do so. He did nothing, and in all likelihood, we are in for a repeat performance from a Labor government and a Prime Minister that talks big when it comes to infrastructure, including high-speed rail, and yet consistently fails to deliver.

When the Prime Minister made his announcement in Newcastle, in January this year, he said that, if elected, Labor would commit $500 million towards this project in its first term. It's a little bit like somebody saying, 'I'm going to buy myself a house in Sydney, median price $1.5 million, and I'm setting aside $3,750 for that purpose, because that's the ratio. On any realistic assessment, the amount that is being set aside is as if you are saying, when buying a house with a median price of $1.5 million: 'I'm setting aside $3,750.'

Of course, if the Albanese Labor government does seriously intend to spend $200 billion to $300 billion, just exactly how they're going to pay for that? What taxes would have to arise as a result? According to the Grattan Institute, east coast high-speed rail, Melbourne to Brisbane, would cost each taxpayer $10,000 in higher taxes. You might live in Adelaide or Cairns or Darwin or Hobart or Perth and never use this high-speed rail link—that is supposedly going to be the outcome, at some point, of this authority which is being set up now, but you'd certainly pay for it, according to the analysis from the Grattan Institute.

I want to remind the House that there is a much better way, as the member for Fisher was speaking about, and that is the commitment that the coalition made and did a lot of work on the delivery of, the commitment to faster rail. What is the core idea here? The idea is to make practical upgrades to existing tracks between capital cities and surrounding regional areas, with a view to being to be able to run services at up to 140 kilometres an hour.

What sorts of practical upgrades would be involved? Well, it would be measures like replacing sharp curves with more gradual curves. Alternatively, or additionally, you could upgrade stretches of track from two to four tracks. That would allow trains to travel more quickly and frequently. Critically, it would also allow the running of both express and all-stops trains, using the four-track stretches to allow the express trains to pass the all-stops trains.

The coalition released its 20-year national Faster Rail Plan in 2019, and, at the March 2022 budget, committed a further $3.72 billion to deliver faster rail, bringing total commitments to faster rail projects to $6 billion. Now, one of the projects to which there was a commitment made was the $1.6 billion for the Brisbane to Sunshine Coast extension, as the member for Fisher was talking about. I want to emphasise this point. The extension from the existing rail line, which, as the member for Fisher rightly pointed out, travels inland, the extension from Beerwah to Maroochydore, has been planned, with the Commonwealth government working with the Queensland government, to use the CAMCOS corridor, which, thanks to some far-sighted work by the then Queensland government 20 or so years ago, has been set aside. This funding commitment has been arrived at, based upon pretty detailed planning work. Of course, critically, it will also support the Sunshine Coast—not just for its important and continuing long-term transport needs but also for Olympics needs, given there will be Olympics venues on the Sunshine Coast.

Now, one of the other commitments that was made in the 2022-23 budget was $1.12 billion for Brisbane to the Gold Coast. That is a route of approximately 90 kilometres, and, again, one of the key pieces of transport planning logic here was that, along a stretch of track of about 90 kilometres, roughly in the middle, you would upgrade from two tracks to four, and, again, there would be some straightening of lines and reduction in sharp curves and so on.

These very practical measures have significant benefits. They allow faster rail, faster and more frequent services, to be delivered, and for that to be done much more quickly than high-speed rail, which, on any view, has a very long lead time. Don't take my word for it; take the word of the study commissioned by the then Prime Minister between 2010 and 2013.

So the coalition developed, and worked to implement, a practical plan to deliver faster rail, with a particular focus on faster rail between our big cities and surrounding regional areas: Brisbane-Gold Coast, Brisbane-Sunshine Coast, Sydney-Newcastle—and I do want to come to Sydney-Newcastle, because we've heard a bit about this $500 million that is supposedly to be spent by the Labor government. It's very unclear how much of that would actually be spent on rail track or land acquisition and how much of it would be spent on establishing an authority and having plush offices, and fees for directors and advisers and all kinds of other things. But there is a sharp contrast to be drawn between that and the very specific and tangible billion dollars' worth of funding included for Sydney-Newcastle in the March budget—and again, the logic is to go from two tracks to four on a significant stretch in the middle of the Sydney to Newcastle corridor, Wyong to Tuggerah; and again, that could be delivered quickly, or certainly much more quickly than high-speed rail, and would deliver immediate and practical benefits within a reasonably foreseeable time frame.

So the coalition is certainly supportive of faster rail. It has a great capacity to improve rail services, with services that are faster, more frequent and more reliable. It has a great capacity to stimulate regional growth and to improve access to jobs and services and affordable housing. What we did was develop a practical, workable plan with specific funding commitments, working closely with state and territory governments. I have neglected to mention that we'd previously made a commitment of $2 million under the Faster Rail Plan for faster rail from Melbourne to Geelong. The focus of the coalition on these issues when in government was practical, deliverable, cost-effective measures to get an outcome.

So I have to say that I look with some scepticism at the nature of the measures that are contained in this bill. They won't deliver even one kilometre of very fast rail track. They'll set up an authority, and I'm sure it will have meetings in a range of desirable locations, and conferences and off-sites in a range of five-star hotels and so on. But the fact is that what matters in infrastructure is delivery. We know, for example, that we have a Prime Minister with a track record of talking big on infrastructure. He's talked about the second Sydney airport since the day he came into the parliament. He had all kinds of big plans for Western Sydney Airport. He was the minister for infrastructure from 2007 to 2013, and he could not get it delivered. He could not get through the trenchant, backward looking, head-in-the-sand opposition of a number of Labor MPs from Western Sydney, particularly the member for Chifley. He just could not get through that opposition. He could not get it delivered.

It took the coalition to get Western Sydney Airport underway, in 2014. It took the coalition government to make a decision to get Western Sydney Airport moving, and it took the coalition government to get us to a position where, when we left office, we handed over a project where the contracts had been let for the runway, the terminal and the landside works, and $2 billion worth of earthmoving had been done. If you want to see what $2 billion worth of earthmoving looks like, go out and take a drive along the Northern Road, which has also upgraded to four lanes all the way from Penrith to Narellan. That's one of the incidental benefits for the people of Western Sydney from the coalition government delivering on infrastructure and delivering on Western Sydney Airport.

So I say to this House that when it comes to infrastructure we do hear a lot of talk from Labor. We heard a lot of talk about the NBN—my goodness, they talked! It was fibre to the press release. When they left office, barely 51,000 premises had been delivered. Who was the minister, by the way, at the time they left office? It was the current Prime Minister. A bit of a theme there: a lot of talk, not much delivery. I say to you that this High Speed Rail Authority is perpetuation of that theme—a lot of talk, not much delivery. Look at the infrastructure record on this side of the House. With the NBN, we inherited a trainwreck of a project and we turned it around. When we left government just a few months ago, 8.4 million premises had been connected to the NBN, compared to the 51,000 connected to fixed-line NBN after six years and $6 billion from Labor. Similarly, there was practical delivery from the side of the House when it comes to faster rail, getting projects in place that won't take 30 or 40 years to make happen. By contrast, this High Speed Rail Authority is a piece of pure political window-dressing and vapourware from somebody who has made a bit of a specialty of just that.

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Katter's Australian Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr Deputy Speaker, the amendment—

Ian Goodenough (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The member for Kennedy, you don't have the call.

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Katter's Australian Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We are allowed to speak twice.

Paul Fletcher (Bradfield, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Government Services and the Digital Economy) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

No, you're not.

Bob Katter (Kennedy, Katter's Australian Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

That's not correct. I've been here a lot longer than you, my friend, and I think I know a bit more about it than you.

Ian Goodenough (Moore, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I call the honourable minister.

Ms Catherine King (Ballarat, Australian Labor Party, Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I thank all members for their contributions on this High Speed Rail Authority Bill 2022. I do want to acknowledge the Leader of the Nationals and the members for Higgins, Riverina, Newcastle, Sturt, Perth, Ryan, Kingsford Smith, Lyne, Fisher, Braddon, Kennedy and Forde. There are a lot of people who really love trains in this place, which is lovely to see. I thank them all very much for their very thoughtful contributions in relation to that.

This bill, of course, does establish the High Speed Rail Authority to develop, advise on and plan for the high-speed rail system in Australia. It will of course deliver on our election commitment and will plan for high-speed rail along Australia's east coast, from Melbourne to Brisbane, but in particular concentrating, in that early phase, on the connection between Sydney, the Central Coast and Newcastle. They'll be progressed as a first priority.

I want to respond to a couple of contributions, particularly that of the member for Braddon. The coalition have signalled they're supporting this bill. I understand that may not have been the position he wanted to take, but that's what's happened. Faster rail will continue. That work will absolutely continue. I do recognise how important that is. It's why I have been at pains, when I've been working with state and territory colleagues, to ensure that money for heavy rail projects in particular continues to be in the budget.

I also welcome the contribution from the member for Fisher and acknowledge his thanks for keeping that money within the budget. I also say to him that that was also at the request of the Queensland state government, so there is a commitment to the project. Obviously, there's some longer term work needed, particularly as part of the Olympics in terms of the entire public transport network and how people are going to move around. In relation to that, we want to make sure that we leave a long-term legacy for people to use the systems and the transport long after that. So I welcome that.

I particularly want to say thank you very much to the member for Ryan, for your again thoughtful contribution and your engagement with my office, respectfully and collegiately. I think that's a very good model to have when working with government. I do acknowledge the sentiments of the amendments that you have proposed. As you know, we have signalled before this that we won't be supporting them.

The purpose of the bill is simply to establish the High Speed Rail Authority as the statutory agency. Our position is that the funding, financing, construction and operation of the rail network is not for this legislation in and of itself to determine. Obviously, if you look at our record and, certainly, if you look at the Prime Minister's record, privatisation of these sorts of assets has not traditionally been something that we are keen on. Certainly, it's not for this legislation to determine, but it should be considered part of the planning work of the High Speed Rail Authority once it's actually established. The authority will be charged with advising the responsible minister on environmental matters. Those are important issues in terms of any planning, both at the federal and state level. The authority will be responsible for consulting stakeholders to ensure adequate consideration of both the environment and community interests during that consultation, and that the operation of high-speed rail network occurs as well.

The government is committed to delivering a national rail manufacturing plan as well, which is something I'm particularly proud of and keen to see happen. It will ensure more trains are actually built here in Australia by local manufacturing workers and that federal funding spent on rail projects is used to leverage those jobs within rail manufacturing in particular. I have a particular interest in that, Ballarat having a rail manufacturing workshop which I think is now almost 150 years old. That was manufacturing trains originally, but it is now continuing to service them. It's for these reasons that we won't be supporting the second reading amendment today. I acknowledge again the contribution of the member for Ryan in that process. I do again want to thank members for their contributions here.

High-speed rail opens up choices. It is not an either/or: do we do faster rail or high-speed rail? It's about saying very clearly that we know we have to do significant improvements on our rail networks in many areas, including in my own constituency. It's over a hundred years old. It was set up for people to head from regional areas to do shopping in town, in some instances. It wasn't set up as big commuter lines. We want to try to make sure that we can do that.

But being in government and having the capacity to sit on this side of the chamber is also about vision. It's about what you think the future of the country should look like. I would say to the member for Braddon that that is epitomised by his contribution. It was 'let's just do this bit'. But what's the vision for the country? What do you want the future to be? What are the settlement patterns that will open up around the east coast with high-speed rail? If the point of government is just to manage and to do a little better—that's not how we think of government. We think government is an opportunity to change and shape the nation. I understand; this is a 20-, 30-, 40-year project. But imagine what it will do for new communities, new opportunities and new settlements all along that corridor and the opportunity it will provide to change the nature of the relationship between our cities, our regions and our rural communities in a way that will allow people to live and work in the magnificent and beautiful places of Australia, one of which I happen to live in, as do many others on all sides of this place.

It will allow people to live closer to where they work and stop people having to commute so much, and it will offer choice. That's really what this bill is about. It's about a vision for the country. It's the start of a process to do the work that is needed to establish a high-speed rail authority, while we continue the important work of improving our rail network, through fast and faster rail, and continuing to work on projects like Inland Rail and others that are important to our nation. I thank all members for their contribution to this debate.

Milton Dick (Speaker) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the amendment be disagreed to.