House debates

Monday, 18 April 2016

Bills

Road Safety Remuneration Repeal Bill 2016, Road Safety Remuneration Amendment (Protecting Owner Drivers) Bill 2016; Second Reading

4:43 pm

Photo of Ken O'DowdKen O'Dowd (Flynn, National Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak on the Road Safety Remuneration Amendment (Protecting Owner Drivers) Bill 2016. I would like to acknowledge the harrowing future faced by drivers impacted by enacting the road safety remuneration order of 2016. As you know, many Australians do not know how the goods and services they require arise so spectacularly each day from an unknown source. The unknown source, of course, is the trucking industry. It could be big trucks—haulage from large companies—but, mainly, the further west you go or the further you go out of the big cities, it is the small owner-driver who delivers services such as food and the like.

The bill that had been introduced would apply on 4 April 2016. That would have put the grocery prices up alarmingly. Owner-drivers drive all night according to their logbooks. They deliver the food and clothing not only for the people out there who need these services but for their own children. Mum-and-dad truck operators are the life and breath of Australia. It is absolutely true that truckies keep Australia moving. That saying has been around for a long, long time. These owner-drivers are not only drivers; they are small business owners. Small businesses are the backbone of our economy and we need to stop them from being preyed on by damaging regulations like the RSRT.

They are not just good drivers; they are professional drivers. They do not want to damage their trucks. They do not want to have accidents on the roads. But they have to be aware of the other people on the roads, and I would say they are more likely to cause accidents than the heavy-duty driver. I can go back to when I used to own trucks and have a fleet of trucks. We were a group of fuel distributers. We were all members of APADA, a group that looked after fuel agents. There was a perception out there then that we were dangerous drivers and that our trucks needed to be double-insured. As we got together as a group, we formed our own insurance company—called OAMPS, which is still around today—and we then were able to prove to the insurance companies of Australia that we were in fact the safest drivers in Australia. Consequently, our insurance rates dropped by at least 50 per cent and we also got dividends from the profit that we made out of the other people who used OAMPS. That was a separate story, but it was started by the perception that we were the most dangerous drivers in Australia. It is not true.

I have been approached by several operators in my electorate who are just beside themselves, worried about the new order. They are worried about how they are going to pay for the leasing of their trucks and their premises, and the wages for staff. The mechanics and the fuel distributer have to be paid. The maintenance has to be paid for. The brake linings on the trucks, all the stuff comes into it.

I have had people from Monto, Gerry and Sandra Morgan; Kirk Porter from KJP Haulage in Gladstone; and Julie Just, who was down here today. She did not want to be here but she had to be here. Her husband is not all that well. He has not experienced good health over the last few years. She virtually runs the business and she had better things to do than come down here today for the rally yesterday and the rally this morning.

There are other people out there. There is grain haulage. There are furniture removalists who have the owner-driver truck situation. There are the guys who cart cattle and sheep all across Australia. They are very badly affected by these new rules. That is why the new rules have to go. You cannot have a two-tier pricing system—one for the big guys and one for the little guys.

What happened to price fixing? It was against the law to fix prices. I do not know what has happened with that law. In my day if you tried to fix the bowser price, you would be thrown into jail. If that is not price fixing, I would like to know what is. I am sure that the ACCC would not approve. Big Brother, having to know what you have to charge for your freight—that is unfair, when you do not know what he is charging for his freight. He can charge anything he likes. But he knows that you have been told what you can charge. I have never seen a system like it. It will just put small businesses completely out of business.

And it has already happened. Inside a month, there are people out there who have lost their trucks, had their contracts cancelled by the big operators. The blokes who are subbing have lost their contracts because the big guy said: 'I can't afford your rates anymore because you are governed by the RSRT.' I have never seen anything like it. And if you do not comply, you can cop a fine for $54,000 and a jail term. Who is going to risk their family and their life? The whole business is up in the air. We have to bring certainty back to these people and bring it back to them today.

It is just totally unfair the way this has panned out. Talk about safety! Everyone is involved in safety. Everyone cares about safety. But can you tell me what is fair about a logbook system where—because of your logbook you drive according to what your logbook tells you—you might be in the back of Woop Woop, the back of Broken Hill, and your time is up to have a rest. So you pull your truck over on the side of the road. There are no toilets. There are no showers. There is no food. And you are stranded in the cab of the truck for eight hours while you have a rest. Then you are expected to get up and drive for your next turn. If you can imagine yourself in that situation, can you imagine waking up fresh and alert after spending eight hours in a truck in fifty degree temperatures with no food, and just a wash out of the tank on the side of the truck? I do not think that is a good idea. Why doesn't the regulator look at those sorts of issues?

When a small truck goes into a depot in the port of Melbourne, he is told he can load at eight o'clock in the morning. So he gets there and he plans his day; he plans his night and where he is going to stop. Then all of a sudden a Toll truck or a Lindsay Fox truck comes in in front of him. He has been pushed back. What does he do in the meantime? He sits around. And then a Toll truck comes in and goes to the head of the queue again, and the small-time operator gets pushed back again. No wonder he ends up tired. Fatigue has not been looked at by the tribunal, and that is a real safety issue.

As the coalition government we are spending money on our roads. Roads are the workplace of these drivers. We have invested $50 billion in the Black Spot Program, bridge renewal programs and Bruce Highway improvements in Queensland, but here we are still looking at safety issues. They can be improved. There is no-one on this side of the House or that side of the House saying that they cannot be improved. They can be, but we have to work together on this. We cannot do it by flattening our small-time operators. They are not the problem. It is the system that is the problem. That is why the tribunal should be sacked—because it is not looking at the real issues. Our heavy vehicle drivers are professional drivers, and they are not at fault. The tribunal is at fault, and that is why we must abolish it. I commend this bill to the House.

Comments

No comments