Mark Coulton (Parkes, National Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Ageing and the Voluntary Sector) Share this | Hansard source

I rise tonight to support the AusLink (National Land Transport) Amendment Bill 2008. Mr Deputy Speaker Scott, from determination from the Deputy Speaker before you, this is a wide-ranging debate, and I will take the opportunity to add some comments not only on this government’s attitude to infrastructure but on the attitude of the minister himself. For the benefit of the member for Isaacs, I have here a heavy vehicle drivers licence. I come to this place with experience in driving a heavy vehicle. I also have an electorate in which it takes eight hours to drive from one end to the other—it includes the Newell Highway—and in which probably 30 per cent of the roads are impassable after as little as 10 millimetres of rain. So I am not in here speaking theory or political chat; I am here to represent the people of my electorate.

I would like you to cast your mind back, Mr Deputy Speaker, to last Thursday when the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government was on his feet and just before he was expelled from this place by the Speaker. Just before question time on that day, I had a school in the gallery—Mallawa Primary School—a great little school west of Moree in my electorate on the black soil plains. I was explaining to them, at about five to two, that they were here at an ideal time in the day because they would see question time. I was about to explain what went on when the head teacher said: ‘No, Mr Coulton, we do not want them to stay here for question time. I’ve been teaching my students about manners and respect, and I don’t want them to see question time.’ After the debacle that was question time at last Thursday’s sitting, that teacher showed great judgement by not allowing her students to see that.

At that time, the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government had a series of documents which were requests for funding from members of this House. It is my understanding that, as a member of this House, I take requests from my constituents, whether they be individuals, shires, mayors or general managers, and pass them on to the minister for due consideration. On that Thursday he made a mockery of that whole situation. I say to my colleagues on this side of the House how disgusted I am that the people of Australia have got to the stage where they do not want school students to come into this place. Those opposite say, ‘Oh yes, but it’s a bit of theatre; don’t take any notice. It’s for the benefit of the people up there in the press gallery. It’s about getting a grab on the news.’ What about the people in this gallery? What about the students who sit up there in the soundproof booths, who come here to look at our place of government? I have to say that I am a little disgusted at the behaviour that is going on here. I am not casting aspersions on the Speaker of this House, the Hon. Harry Jenkins, or any of the Deputy Speakers; I think they are doing a fantastic job. And I am addressing my comments not only to the other side of the House but to this place in general. We will need to tidy up our act if we are going to win back the confidence of the people of this country.

Infrastructure is a sacred cow for the people of my electorate. The portfolio of the Minister for Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government covers my electorate immensely. The government wiped out the Regional Partnerships program on the pretext that it was rorting. There have been umpteen dozen inquiries into that partnership, and there have been no cases of any undue activity. It was an excuse to gut spending for regional Australia. I have heard the member for Blair speak here before about the great largesse that has come to his electorate on the pretext of funding election promises of $10 million for the main street of Ipswich. I have no problem with that, but the hypocrisy of the minister for infrastructure in making a mockery in question time of the people of this House, the elected representatives, for a ploy for television I find quite repulsive.

I cannot speak for everyone else in this House but I can speak for myself, and I can tell you why I oppose that bill for the heavy vehicles charges determination: it was bad policy and it was bad for the people of my electorate. I will explain this because the member for Isaacs might not be familiar with terminology in the trucking industry. In a B-double you have an A trailer and a B-trailer. They are the safest form of transport on the road. They allow large volumes of freight to be moved economically, and the development of the B-double has made smaller trucking firms viable.

Right across my electorate we now have transport operators disconnecting their A-trailers because of the cost. They are pulling 22 or 23 tonnes instead of 42 tonnes, so we have more movement and more vehicles on the road, and those businesses are going under. Heavy vehicle charges are fine for the big trucking companies—they are quite happy with them because they have contracts and can pass them on—but consumers will pay more. Operators in my electorate, whether they are farmers or small transport operators, cannot pass the charges on to anyone. I have transport companies in my electorate going broke hand over fist because of some theory in here about road safety. I think we need to have a close look at road safety and not just put more small trucks on the road because operators cannot afford to run the more efficient B doubles.

This bill proposes technical amendments to the AusLink (National Land Transport) Act 2005 to achieve three objectives, one of which is to extend the Roads to Recovery program from 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2014. It is this aspect of the bill which I believe will have the biggest impact for the majority of the constituents of my electorate. This legislation will see the Roads to Recovery program receive $350 million a year for the next year five years, and I commend the government for matching the coalition’s election promise. It is surprising to see the government finally making a decision that will have a positive impact on rural and regional electorates. Their previous actions have seen them axe millions of dollars from regional programs. That has certainly been cause for concern, and it is a relief that finally a worthwhile program has not been put on the chopping block just for the sake of playing politics.

Roads to Recovery was, of course, an initiative of the previous coalition government. My predecessor, John Anderson, was instrumental in the implementation of this program, and it is to his credit that Roads to Recovery has been so immensely popular and successful. In my electorate of Parkes, every local mayor and general manager that I have spoken to about Roads to Recovery has told me how heavily they rely on the program to assist them in upgrading and maintaining local roads.

As a former Mayor of Gwydir Shire Council, I know from firsthand experience how important this program is for local councils. I believe that much of its success lies in the fact that it effectively cuts out the middleman of the state governments and provides direct and discretional funding. Councils are able to decide which roads need work and can set their own agenda. As a mayor, I found this to be the most effective aspect of the program. The best people to judge which roads need upgrading in a community are the locals that drive on them every day. This program is structured so that there is no place for city based bureaucrats to make the decisions about roads that they have no extensive knowledge of. I think this has been a major element of the program’s popularity, particularly in rural areas.

The Roads to Recovery program has vastly improved the condition of many local roads in my electorate and continues to do so. All of the councils in my electorate, which include the Dubbo, Moree Plains, Narrabri, Mid Western Regional, Walgett, Coonamble, Gwydir, Wellington, Gilgandra, Warrumbungle and Gunnedah shire councils, have literally received millions of dollars over the years to improve local roads, and it is pleasing to know that this will continue.

Some specific projects which have been funded through Roads to Recovery in my electorate include the replacement of the Gowan Creek Bridge near Ballimore, improvements to Talbragar Street in Dubbo and Tooraweenah Road, the sealing of Maryvale Road in Wellington and also the upgrade to the Baradine Gwabegar Road. Gilgandra Shire were able to improve the Armatree to Warren Road, Moree Plains Shire made improvements to Main Road 507 between Mungindi and Boomi, Walgett Shire were able to re-sheet the Collarenebri to Mungindi Road and my own council, Gwydir Shire Council, were able to make vast improvements to the roads around Croppa Creek, Gravesend and Bingara.

Despite these great projects being completed, there is always more work that needs to be done. For many reasons it is so important that local roads are kept in the best possible condition. Firstly, it is necessary to remember that almost every product that we export, and a lot of the products that end up on our supermarket shelves, begins its life on a country road. It is necessary for local country roads to be maintained so that our farmers and truck drivers can ensure their product ends up at its final destination in the best possible condition. Many farmers are at risk of breaching contractual obligations regarding the delivery of produce because of the poor condition of their roads.

Secondly, regional roads often have high numbers of tourists travelling on them. In my electorate, we have a number of highly popular tourist attractions, including the wine regions of Mudgee, the Warrumbungle Mountains near Coonabarabran and the artesian spas in the Moree district. We have a large number of visitors to these areas each year, and often they are grey nomads towing a caravan. It is important that we keep our roads in good condition so that we can continue to attract the tourism dollars.

The third reason for keeping country roads maintained is, to me, the most important, and that is safety. Too many accidents occur on country roads and the condition of the roads is often a factor in accidents in my electorate. Many of the roads in my electorate are gravel and keeping these roads either regularly graded or re-sheeted, or eventually being able to seal them, is a huge priority and can literally mean the difference between life and death. Indeed, many of the roads in the western area of my electorate have reverted to black soil. This is the reality of living in rural Australia in the 21st century. Roads to Recovery is simply an excellent program and it fills some of the gaps that are left by the state Labor government when it comes to road funding. I am delighted that this bill will see it continue.

I have touched on this before, but another important aspect of this bill amends the definition of ‘road’ contained in the AusLink (National Land Transport) Act 2005 so as to put beyond doubt that projects for the development of off-road facilities used by trucks may be funded under the AusLink program. This will mean that future funding under AusLink may be applied to roadside rest stops, parking bays and decoupling facilities. I support this amending legislation as I know that this will make a major difference to many of the major roads in my electorate. I have several major roads going through my electorate, including the Newell Highway, which is one of Australia’s major freight corridors, linking Melbourne to Brisbane.

I have had discussions with many truck drivers in my electorate, including Mr Rod Hannifey of Dubbo, about the conditions of the facilities made available for truck drivers. Incidentally, Mr Hannifey also spent time with the Leader of the Opposition, Dr Nelson, recently, when Dr Nelson and Rod spent 12 hours driving in a truck together from Melbourne to Dubbo. One of the main issues that Rod raised with me, and I know he raised it with the Leader of the Opposition as well, was not only the condition of the highways but the poor design and lack of rest stops available for our truck drivers. Truck drivers have to comply with an enormous number of regulations in order to carry out their day-to-day job, and part of those regulations includes taking regular breaks to ensure not only their safety but the safety of other drivers on our roads. It is very difficult for drivers when there are not adequate roadside stops, and this bill will mean that there will be a greater pool of money available to improve these facilities for truck drivers.

Our nation’s truck drivers provide a vital service to all members of the community as they deliver all of the goods that we use every day. I am proud to support our nation’s truck drivers by supporting this bill, and I know that by doing so I am helping to improve their working conditions and to recognise their worth in our community. I am also putting their safety above politics, but unfortunately those opposite are not giving Australian truck drivers the same consideration.

In the second reading of this bill, the minister outlined the government’s policy on the heavy vehicle safety and productivity package, stating that the safety package is contingent on the passage of the enabling legislation for the 2007 Heavy Vehicle Charges Determination. The opposition has already rejected the 2007 Heavy Vehicle Charges Determination in the Senate this year because it would have seen an increase in heavy vehicle registration fees. We can see that our truck drivers are already doing it tough and it is a real shame that the government are trying to blackmail the opposition into increasing the costs for trucking industry. Along with my coalition colleagues, I remain firm on this issue.

Consumers, particularly those in regional areas like my electorate of Parkes, are already facing increased costs. To slap the trucking industry with yet another charge will only increase the cost for the transport of goods. If there was an increase in heavy vehicle fees, the major players in the industry would have no choice but to pass the costs on to the consumer, increasing the prices at our supermarkets and grocery stores. Smaller operators like the many farmers in my electorate who only drive their trucks to the silo during harvest time have not got anyone to pass the costs on to. They would be forced to bear the direct brunt of the costs themselves and this would be yet another financial blow that our farmers do not need.

The government should be putting the safety and financial security of the trucking industry before politics. They should not try to blackmail the opposition into making things tougher for our truck drivers. I join with my coalition colleagues, particularly the Leader of the Nationals, in asking the government to simply adopt the heavy vehicle safety and productivity package without placing conditions on it. The lives of truck drivers and all other drivers on our roads should not be risked in order to play petty politics.

See this speech in context