Barnaby Joyce (New England, National Party, Leader of the Nationals) | Link to this | Hansard source

I present the explanatory memorandum to this bill and move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The Road Vehicle Standards Act 2018 is about applying nationally consistent vehicle safety and environmental performance and security standards while also meeting consumer expectations that they may purchase a broad variety of road vehicles. The government set a 12-month transition period for adjustment to the new legislation, which commenced on 1 July 2021. But, over the past few years, almost all road vehicle manufacturers and importers have had to manage the severe impacts of the COVID pandemic on workplaces and the global supply chains. After listening to numerous industry participants, the Australian government has determined that a 12-month extension of the transitional period is necessary. A wide range of industry participants will benefit from the 12-month extension, and extending the transitional arrangements makes a level playing field for all participants.

The bill maintains the provisions of the new legislation. Road vehicle providers that have already transitioned to the new regulatory framework will be enabled to continue providing their vehicles, using approvals granted to them under the new legislation. I commend the bill to the House.

Leave granted for second reading debate to continue immediately.

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

I rise to speak in the second reading debate on the Road Vehicle Standards (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Amendment Bill. Frankly, this is where the government has come to us and asked for a further extension to the introduction of the Road Vehicle Standards Bill. That is a bill that the government introduced and that was passed in this House in 2018. It's a really significant measure around road safety in this country.

There are a couple of things I want to observe about this. This is a bit of an indictment on the government as to its incompetence. If you look at the history of this bill, back in 2018, Labor supported the Road Vehicle Standards Bill. So that was four years ago. That bill replaced the Motor Vehicle Standards Act 1989, which regulates the importation of road vehicles into Australia and the first provision of road vehicles into the market on Australian roads. That includes caravans and cranes. It includes importing a vehicle from America, a speciality vehicle, and changing it from left-hand to right-hand drive.

This has always been a really complex and controversial area—always. I thought it was pretty impressive that the then government decided that they were actually going to try and sort this issue out. There were always going to be groups within the road vehicle area that welcomed it and there were always going to be groups that did not want the reform. We supported the bill because its fundamental purpose back in 2018 was to create a much more modern regulatory framework to ensure that road vehicles and certain road vehicle components provided in Australia meet safety, antitheft and emissions standards—really important. So, good on the government, back in 2018, for actually doing that bill.

Because there were significant issues with industry that were recognised at the time, to deal with this the initial bill included a transition period which was almost a year. It was to go right through to 2019. The government, in July 2019, came to us again and said: 'We're not quite ready. We haven't got the datasets. We haven't got the computer systems. The industry's saying, "We're not quite ready."' So we supported an extension again. Being reasonable about it, we supported that extension of the transition period, and that was to conclude on 30 June this year.

Now, in March, this bill is asking us for a further extension. We're not going to stand in the way of the bill. We've indicated to the Deputy Prime Minister's office that we've supported the extension, and we did so in the Senate and supported the passage of the bill.

But I do want to say: look, this is an issue of competence. I understand that the pandemic has delayed a number of things. However, this bill was introduced four years ago. It's not a bill that was just introduced a year ago or two years ago; it was introduced four years ago. The government still haven't got the implementation right, they still haven't got the consultation right, and they've come begging for more time. Frankly, it's a bit of a wasted opportunity. Again, this is not a bill that Labor introduced in government and there have been some unintended consequences or whatever; this is a bill the government introduced. Last week the government approached us—only last week—to propose a further 12-month delay to allow time for industry to make further changes to implement this new system.

As I said, it's a bill that was initially passed some four years ago. It was meant to come into effect three years ago, and it's already been extended once. Our consultations with the industry over the past week have revealed that the truth of the delay is that a whole range of small and medium-sized enterprises are scathing of this government's handling of the transition period, including its communications with affected industry participants and the unwieldy nature of the IT solutions being used to implement the transition. It seems that the government hasn't used the extensions that were given, first in the initial bill transition period and then the second extension it asked for, to actually prepare for the new scheme and its full effect. Frankly, you have to question what they've been doing in this whole process to actually bring this forward.

To me, if this law is fundamentally about road safety, emission standards, ensuring antitheft devices and consistency, the government needs to really think about why it's being delayed. I know this is a really difficult area. It is an area where there will always be conflicting views about what to do. As I said, the government took the decision in 2018 to bite the bullet and try to fix this. They're now just pushing it off and pushing it off again when we're days away from the federal election being called. This mess is going to have to get fixed by whoever wins the next election. I'm saying very clearly that I think we will have to have a good look to see whether this law is actually contemporary and works in the way that it does. I want to make it very clear though that this is something for any incoming government. We should not be back here in this place in yet another year's time saying, 'It's all a bit too hard, the data systems aren't there, the IT systems aren't there and the communications haven't been done.' We can't keep doing this. If you want to enact this law and you think it's the right law to enact, and this is what the parliament agreed, then we actually need to get on with it, or you need to change the law or you need to do your job. As I said, this really does represent the government being pretty incompetent at doing its job.

As I said, Labor will support the bill. We've supported it in the Senate. But, again, this is going to be a problem for any incoming government, whether it's the existing government or an Albanese Labor government. If it's us, I'm pretty determined that we'll fix it.

Barnaby Joyce (New England, National Party, Leader of the Nationals) | Link to this | Hansard source

I'd like to thank honourable members for their consideration of the Road Vehicle Standards (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2022. I concur with and I would like to thank the members of the opposition for expediting this process. There's a clear need to support businesses in the community to adjust to the severe impacts of the COVID pandemic, including workplace and supply chain challenges. This bill does this by providing a 12-month extension to the RVSA transition period.

I commend the bill to the House.

Question agreed to.

Bill read a second time.