Mark Coulton (Parkes, National Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I rise today to speak on the Land Transport Infrastructure Amendment Bill 2014. It gives me a great deal of pleasure to do so. This bill will enable the rollout of Roads to Recovery over six years and help to build vital road and rail projects. As someone who represents a third of New South Wales I fully understand the importance of having good road and rail projects. I would like to pay tribute to one of my predecessors, John Anderson, a former member for Gwydir, who was the minister at the time the Roads to Recovery program was mooted. I might also say that it came from a meeting that was held at Moree, in my electorate, organised by the Moree Plains Shire Council.

This bill will continue the rollout of the program until 30 June 2019, with $1.75 billion in funding. As someone who was previously a mayor of the Gwydir Shire Council I have a great understanding of the importance of the Roads to Recovery program. Roads to Recovery has been one of those programs that you will find no criticism of anywhere in this place, on either side of the House. It is a direct connection of funding from the federal government to local government. The programs are decided by the local government, and a large proportion of the money actually hits the asset where it is supposed to.

As someone who represents 17 local government areas I should say that if it was not for the Roads to Recovery program many of my councils would be in a lot of financial strife. Roads to Recovery funding in my electorate, over the length of the program, is something like $72 million. That is not only enabling many kilometres of new roads and road repairs to be laid out but it is also providing a valuable cash flow and resource for the councils in my area.

This bill will also allow the continuation of the Black Spot Program in places that have been identified as high risk. Even though the road toll over the last 20 or 30 years has been halved in Australia, it is still way too high. Unfortunately many of the people who die on our roads do so on rural roads, and many of them are still dying in identified black spot areas. This program will allow funding to go to those areas.

It is important to realise that pretty much everything we buy on the shelves of our supermarkets started its journey on a local road. Roads to Recovery is directly funding local roads. It does not apply to state roads and it does not apply to national highways. It is direct funding to councils for local roads.

In the Parkes electorate, there are many farms and businesses—that rely on local roads—that generate billions of dollars of export income and provide produce that finds its way onto the shelves of supermarkets not only around Australia but around the world. While this program is very much appreciated, we must not think that we are doing enough for local roads. We need to be constantly looking at how we can continue to fund local roads. I would like to mention the Australian Rural Road Group that was formed by the Gwydir and Moree Plains councils. It has nearly 100 members right around Australia—councils that represent the high-producing agricultural shires in Australia and generally the councils that have low population densities but very high productivity. Quite often, the criterion that is used to measure the use of a road and the need for the funding or the upgrade of a road is traffic count. But that is not enough. We need to be looking at the productivity and the produce that come along the roads and the efficiency that that brings.

The advent of the inland rail line from Melbourne to Brisbane took another step forward with the change of government. Minister Truss has allocated $300 million in the next term of government to get that project up and running. The implementation committee for that project was formed and chaired by my predecessor, John Anderson. That inland rail will provide a steel backbone for infrastructure right down the eastern side of Australia. It will be to Australia what the Mississippi is to the United States. We need to start planning our infrastructure around this inland rail line. We need to start to looking at where local road and rail interface and at how we can get the travel time down to the ports and the major markets, and do it in a more energy efficient way. This rail line will certainly do that.

The main rail line that goes from Sydney to Perth runs through the bottom end of the Parkes electorate. To see double-stacked container trains nearly two kilometres long hurtling through the electorate certainly shows that this is the way of the future to shift freight. It is not much good if we have beef from feedlots or grain or cotton that is stranded on farm because of crummy infrastructure. As we speak, the forecast for rain this week across inland New South Wales and Queensland is very strong. That is a two-edged sword. While we will never not look forward to rainfall, it will mean that children will not be going to school and produce will not be going to market because of the state of the roads.

The issue here with rural roads is how did we got to this point? I would like to compliment the Rural Road Group, because they are working on a pilot program with half a dozen or so local government areas in northern New South Wales and southern Queensland that will measure the actual asset of the road. What has happened in the past—and I know this from experience as a mayor in a local government area—is that, quite often, the value of the write-down of those road assets has not been fully displayed. Because of the close relationship between local government and state government and the very parlous nature of the finances of local government, quite often the full level of the write-down of roads is not reported and it shows up on the balance sheet as a large loss, and the next thing you know is that that local government area is under the watchful eye of the state government for being in financial difficulty. So over the years, the actual size of the problem has been disguised somewhat. What is happening now in Moree Plains, Gwydir, Narrabri and some of the council areas in southern Queensland is that they are developing an asset management tool that can be transferred right across Australia. So at one point, as a government we can look at the state of every road in Australia and it will be in a recognised reporting system. We will be able to start to identify some priorities as to where the funds need to go and to start to have an objective look at allocating these assets. The real state of affairs has been hidden for some time. It is time that we looked at managing our assets in a more professional way and it is time that we started tying in the productivity of regional Australia with some of the spending on our road networks.

It does give me a great deal of pleasure to support this bill knowing that we have a government and a minister totally focused on infrastructure, and that we are starting to see a planned rollout for transport infrastructure across Australia and indeed regional Australia. Not only does this tie into the lifestyle effects that I have talked about—getting produce to market, kids to school, people to hospital and the like—but, as we need to be careful with our resources and as we become more aware of the need to preserve what resources we have, we need to be moving this freight around in the most cost-effective way. The road-rail interchange model that is being formulated at the moment is definitely a more cost-effective means to go about it. The number of trucks that that inland rail will take off the Newell Highway will be increased and the number of litres of diesel per tonne of freight moved will be drastically reduced because of this program.

Therefore, I am in support of the Land Infrastructure Amendment Bill 2014. It is a commitment of $35.5 billion in infrastructure investment. It will roll out over six years and, so, local government and infrastructure organisations will have the confidence to know that that funding is ongoing and, every time there is a change government, we will not have to go into this area of uncertainty. It does indicate that the Abbott-Truss government is committed to infrastructure. It does indicate that I am committed to infrastructure. I encourage anyone that is listening to me today to refer to my first speech in this place, in February 2008. Indeed, this is what I spoke about—the need for funding for regional roads, the need for a railway line from Melbourne to Brisbane and the need for a plan to tie it all together. It is such a relief, and it gives me great pleasure, after being in this place for over six years now, to finally be part of a team that has the will, the plans and the gumption to make all this happen.

Nola Marino (Forrest, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The purpose of the Land Transport Infrastructure Amendment Bill 2014 is to amend the Nation Building Program (National Land Transport) Act 2009, to rename the act the National Land Transport Act 2014 and to enable the continuation of what we all know is a very important program, the Roads to Recovery program, beyond 30 June 2014. There are very practical measures in this bill. We in rural and regional Australia well understand the importance of having practical measures to deliver critical infrastructure in regional areas right throughout Australia.

The bill also amends the Nation Building Program (National Land Transport) Act 2009 to combine parts 3 and 6 into one part for investment, to streamline the act—again, a very practical measure—and to add a new eligible project type into part 4 to allow funding of research and investigations of projects funded under the act or submitted for consideration for funding under the act. As we know, such research will inform advice to government and enhance the management of projects. Also, it will add two new eligible funding recipients—partnerships for parts 4 and 5 and funding for land transport research entities and non-corporate Commonwealth entities for part 5—to expand the types of organisations that can be funded to undertake research, investigations, studies and analysis under the act. Again, these are practical measures. The bill also repeals the Australian Land Transport Development Act 1988, the Roads to Recovery Act 2000 and the Railway Standardization (New South Wales and Victoria) Agreement Act 1958, as these are all spent legislation.

Amendments to the Nation Building Program are necessary to allow the government to proceed with what is an ambitious infrastructure agenda. I am very proud to be part of an infrastructure government under an infrastructure Prime Minister. The key function of the bill is to enable the continuation of what is unconditionally known as a very successful and critical program—the Roads to Recovery program. This provides desperately needed funding to local governments for the maintenance of the nation's local road infrastructure. What connects people and communities, and all of the economic multipliers in regional areas, is mostly because of roads. It is very, very important funding for local governments. When I talk to my local governments, each one of them always tells me how important this funding is for them to be able to deliver what is needed in their particular areas.

The current program stalls on 30 June and it specifies funding to that date. The bill removes the definition and specification of the funding period and places it in the Roads to Recovery list. In practical terms, this removes the need to introduce a new bill to the parliament every time the Roads to Recovery funding period changes, and ensures that this critical program will continue. This is a very, very good measure contained in this bill. It will ensure that that real delivery on the ground in rural, regional and remote areas of Australia will continue.

As we know, and we have heard repeatedly in this place, local councils would struggle to be able to deliver their roads programs, if at all, without this funding. The bill also allows the minister to determine a Roads to Recovery list. This will be exempt from disallowance under the Legislative Instruments Act 2003. Again, this provides certainty, which is so important to local governments. It provides certainty to local government funding recipients of the program.

The bill combines part 3 of the original National Building Program act with part 6, or off-network projects, into one part for all investment projects. This is a unification and streamlining and, for practical purposes, will enhance the operation of the act. The existing parts 3 and 6 contain a significant number of identical provisions and combining them will remove the unnecessary duplication of provisions. The new part 3 for investment projects also includes a new requirement that states and territories notify the minister as soon as possible after the sale or disposal of land that was acquired using Australian government funding. That will ensure that proper accountability is maintained and that there is a timely response to land sales or disposals from both the states and territories and the Australian government. Then the proceeds of the sale or disposal should be allocated to new infrastructure projects that enhance the Australian economy and continue to remove the existing bottlenecks, which we know in regional areas are really important and affect how products get to market. They are things that affect the economies in regional and rural areas.

The bill also alters the value of work that can currently be exempted from public tender requirements. Currently, the amount is prescribed by regulations; however, this will be altered to determination instead by legislative instrument. That will reduce the regulatory delays. It introduces a new type of project that can receive funding under part 4 for transport, development and innovation projects. Projects that involve research investigation studies or analysis of the important black spot projects, previously funded off-network projects and works funded under the Roads to Recovery program will be eligible for part 4 funding. It could also be used for projects submitted for consideration for funding as investment or black spot projects, again to help form advice to government.

This amendment enhances the management of projects and the infrastructure investment program. The bill also adds two new types of eligible funding recipient into the act. Partnerships have been added for funding recipients in parts 4 and 5. This change simplifies funding arrangements for firms without a body corporate structure. Non-corporate Commonwealth entities whose functions include research related to land transport research operations will now be able to receive funding under part 5, which is funding for land transport research entities.

The government has committed, importantly, to continuation of the Black Spot Programme, which provides funding to address road sites that are high-risk areas for serious crashes. There are many of these around Australia, and it is a program that is essential for state and local governments to be able to fulfil their local road safety commitments. Black spot projects are administered under part 7 and remain largely unchanged. The bill makes no amendments to the national land transport network. The network contains the key road and rail links connecting Australia and is a vital component of the government's infrastructure investment program.

Like many in this place, it would not surprise the House that, in discussions about transport infrastructure, the needs of my electorate of Forrest should also be considered. The bill before the House today repeals the Roads to Recovery Act 2000, which instigated the Roads to Recovery Program. It was moved into the AusLink (National Land Transport) Act 2005 and then the nation-building program of 2009. AusLink was a defining national network that superseded the former national highway system and included important road and rail infrastructure links and their intermodal connections. It was first proposed in a green paper issued in 2002. AusLink connected many of the major economic and population centres of Australia; but, when it came to the south-west of Western Australia, this actually stopped at Bunbury in my electorate.

In the intervening years the south-west has grown significantly. It is now one of the fastest-growing regional areas in Australia. I well understand the budget challenges created by the former Labor government; however, I will continue to work towards having some of the major arterial roads in the south and east of Bunbury recognised by the federal government as roads of national significance. This is important because in the south-west we produce seven per cent of WA's total gross state product and in recent years there has been a 10 per cent growth rate in the south-west. As we know, Western Australia produces 46 per cent of Australia's export wealth. In time, as soon as the budget allows, I would hope that all levels of government would contribute to road infrastructure in the south-west given the continuous growth that we are seeing. Only then will the region be able to grow and develop to its full potential.

As I have said, the south-west is a jewel in the grown of the state's economic and cultural development. It is an environmental icon as well, listed as one of the world's international biodiversity hot spots. The region is also a tourism and holiday destination of choice. The fact that we have major infrastructure through the port is often overlooked. We also have significant exports; over 10 million tonnes is exported through the port of Bunbury on an annual basis. Mining and resource manufacturing are a major part of my electorate, and that is why transport links are so important. It is another reason the tax on diesel fuel—the carbon tax that Labor were to impose in July this year—would have a critical impact right throughout Western Australia and throughout my electorate.

The wide range of activity in the south-west, coupled with the significant regional population growth of over 2.1 per cent a year compared with the state's average of 1.8 per cent and the nation's 1.4, continues to put significant pressure on the transport infrastructure of the region. Frequently I look at the waste and mismanagement in the previous government and think what some of those funds—and even what is currently being paid in interest on the debt that has been acquired—would do to deliver infrastructure in my region.

With this in mind, the Bunbury Outer Ring Road project is an essential and urgent piece of infrastructure. This is a project that has been expanded in stages. I was at the opening of stage 1 of the port access road in 2010. Stages 1 and 2 of Bunbury Outer Ring Road were completed last year. The remaining stage of the Bunbury Outer Ring Road is estimated to cost over $700 million, and that is why I can understand the challenges facing the budget and why, if it were not for some of the waste and mismanagement, these are the types of projects we would be able to fund. I look forward to a very responsible government looking seriously at these types of road transport projects in the future.

In the longer term I can see throughout the south-west that dual lanes from Perth to Margaret River will be essential. It is one of the fastest-growing regions in Australia and will continue to be so. It is part of my long-term transport vision for the south west, and of course this is also about the economic development of my part of the world. It is a major economic driver for Western Australia and for the Australian economy. As I say, frequently it is not well-understood that not only do we have mining resources but also we have agriculture, forestry, fisheries and tourism. I have one of the most diverse electorates in Australia. Of course that brings with it huge demands for infrastructure, something that I know the minister at the table, Minister Truss, is very well aware off from looking at the infrastructure needs across this country. I am very pleased to support this particular bill and to be a part of an infrastructure minister's efforts, an infrastructure Prime Minister's efforts and an infrastructure government.

Warren Truss (Wide Bay, National Party, Leader of the Nationals) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

May I thank all members who have contributed to the debate. There is a universal agreement on both sides of the parliament that infrastructure and building better infrastructure are important national priorities and that we as a parliament need to do what we can to provide adequate infrastructure to service the needs of our country and our growing economy in the years ahead. This bill will not only help put in place the arrangements for funding for major infrastructure projects, particularly over the next five years, but also it will set in place a legislative framework which will endure and support future governments' initiatives in land transport. The government is committed to building the infrastructure of the 21st century, as the previous speaker, Ms Marino, said and the changes in the bill will help us achieve this goal. The amendments to the Nation Building Program (National Land Transport) Act 2009 are necessary to facilitate the government's ambitious land transparent infrastructure agenda.

The bill continues the vitally important Roads to Recovery program beyond 30 June 2014. Amendments to the act are necessary as it currently specifies the Roads to Recovery funding period as ending on 30 June 2014. The bill removes this specification from the act and places it in Roads to Recovery list, which allows the program to continue and removes the need to amend the act every time the funding period changes.

The bill renames the Nation Building Program (National Land Transport) Act 2009 to the National Land Transport Act 2014, removing the link between the name of the act and the name of the land transport infrastructure funding program. This means that the act will not need to be amended if the name of the land transport infrastructure funding program changes. It is the most sensible name for the act and keeps it above politics. The bill also streamlines and enhances the operation of the act to benefit the states and territories and the Commonwealth.

The bill is consistent with the government's deregulation agenda, repealing three spent land transport infrastructure acts. There are no regulatory or financial impacts on business and on the amendments to the Nation Building Program (National Land Transport) Act 2009 or the repeal of the spent legislation.

I do not propose to respond specifically to all of the comments made by members in their contributions, but I do acknowledge their general support for infrastructure investment and for ensuring that we have an adequate program to meet our nation's needs. Some members spoke in support of existing projects, which are in the program, and many others raised, on behalf of their electorates, other major road projects—all of them, no doubt, worthy. They would like to see these projects included in the land transport program in the years ahead. I hope we can continue to build on the foundations of the past and to expand the quality of our road and rail network right across the nation. This legislation will certainly contribute to that.

There is often debate between both sides of politics as to who has done the most in relation to road funding and road construction and I suspect that that will always be a part of the political debate. The member for Grayndler likes to speak with some degree of pride about what was achieved in his term in government. I would just remind him that the Howard government spent more on infrastructure than the previous ALP government and the next coalition government is going to spend more on infrastructure than the last Labor government. The Howard government was the first to establish a national transport land plan and I think both sides of politics, while we may have different priorities, have sought to work on stronger infrastructure for our nation. I hope that that can be continued in future.

The government has identified a long list of projects that will be our priorities over the next five years. I think all of those projects will make a real difference. I am sure that in addition—unless this government serves for many decades, which we naturally hope to do—there will be projects that will cross governments. I suspect that the list of projects, in many instances, will be fairly similar. On Friday, I had the privilege of opening the Hunter Expressway, for which the money was first provided in 1997 and its actual construction crossed three federal governments. That is not uncommon in these very large infrastructure projects. In reality we need to work constructively as a parliament to put together the kinds of infrastructure projects that will make a real difference in the future.

The program we have announced and we are determined to deliver includes quite a number of new projects. They will be of particular significance in the cities and in regional Australia. Beyond that we have fully committed and budgeted for the projects that the previous government had planned to fund with the proceeds of the mining tax, which commitments it was never going to be capable of meeting. This demonstrates why this government is committed to building and delivering the infrastructure of the 21st century and beyond.

I commend the bill to the House.

Anthony Albanese (Grayndler, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

by leave—The opposition do not intend to divide on the second reading. We do have amendments in consideration in detail but I ask leave to include the correspondence from the minister to me asking whether there would be any additional costs as a result of the change in name in terms of signage. I think it would be appropriate that that be put on the record. I ask leave to table the letter from Minister Truss to me, dated 5 March 2014.

Leave granted.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.