Nigel Scullion (NT, Country Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry) Share this | Hansard source

I move:

That the Road User Charge Determination 2008 (No. 1), made under the Fuel Tax Act 2006, be disallowed.

This government made a lot of noise during the election campaign about reducing the costs for working families—just as we have heard them say over the last few days. I think it is appropriate that Australia has focused on a couple of Labor’s promises and a couple of the assertions that they made throughout the election campaign and before the budget, particularly the assertion that they are all about reducing pressure on Australian families. When I came to this place a little while ago and we debated the Interstate Road Transport Charge Amendment Bill 2008, it was very disturbing to find that that legislation in fact does absolutely the opposite thing. It is very unfortunate for Australians that the Labor Party’s actions have certainly not matched their rhetoric.

One of the very earliest actions of this government was to overhaul the registration charges that apply to the trucking industry by introducing the Interstate Road Transport Charge Amendment Bill 2008. My colleagues and I have some concerns over the changes imposed by the legislation. We are specifically concerned about the significant increases in the registration charges for heavy transport. These increases fall heavily on productive multicombination vehicles—B-doubles and B-triples. People who live in the northern parts of Australia or those areas where much of the road transport takes place would recognise that these are a part of everyday life, because they are the most efficient way to transport goods around Australia. I will just give an example of the outrageous nature of these registration charges. The B-doubles are going to increase from a bit over $8,000 to $14,340—no small amount. That of course includes a multicombination prime mover charge of $7,050. B-triple charges will skyrocket to over $20,340—and, again, that is with the $7,050 multicombination prime mover charge. This is a government who committed to increasing productivity, so it absolutely beggars belief that it would then come into this place and target and penalise the most productive end of the transport industry.

Additionally, this government is applying a formula that mysteriously links increases in registration charges not to CPI but to the cost of improving and maintaining roads. With any other cost, we would simply say, ‘We need to index this to CPI,’ because that is the normal and reasonable thing to do, but these increases in charges are being indexed to the cost of repairing and maintaining roads. And, as you would know, Madam Acting Deputy President, the cost of repairing roads is in fact linked to the cost of oil. Bitumen is the primary ingredient and that is of course linked very closely to the cost of oil—which has also skyrocketed. It is almost a double jeopardy situation for those people who are relying on the transport industry to deliver goods and those people who are part of that transport industry itself.

But the increase in the registration charges is not what I am actually challenging in this disallowance motion today. In addition to increasing the vehicle registration charges, the government has increased excise tax on diesel fuel from 19.633c per litre to 21c per litre, and it has linked further tax increases to the same formula used for vehicle registration charges. In other words, indexation of the fuel excise is back. That concerns me a bit. It seems to me that those on the other side have tried to sneak this through. I thought they were the ones who were saying that they would ensure that fuel prices would go down—yet the first thing they do when they come into this place is introduce a piece of legislation to put the price of fuel up. There is no mystery to that. That is exactly what this legislation seeks to do. It seeks to put the price of fuel up.

The Prime Minister, Mr Rudd, has said: ‘I will get fuel prices down. In the budget, I will make sure that fuel prices go down.’ And here we have a piece of legislation before us that says: ‘Senate, we want you to pass this legislation so that we can put fuel prices up.’ It absolutely beggars belief! The original indexation of fuel excise was introduced by the Keating government and was then abolished by the Howard government in 2001—a seven-year absence. It is now back and it is pegged to a formula that will lock in a tax grab even bigger than the CPI. It is linked to these very esoteric issues about the price of oil and that sort of stuff that actually links this to the cost of roads.

The government could have introduced this tax increase in a number of ways, but they have chosen to do it almost on the sly by introducing, on 13 March 2008, a regulation under the Fuel Tax Act 2006. One would normally expect those opposite to have some sort of a major fanfare. There would normally be trumpets and often small children are involved. There would normally be a lot of cameras and the press are normally encouraged to attend. There would also normally be plenty of media statements about ‘this wonderful piece of legislation we are rolling out’. We are starting to get used to the spin of government. Instead, almost like a bunch of Senate ninjas, they have decided to creep into this place hoping it will somehow slip under the radar. But I am happy to say that those on this side are alive and awake, and we are very much onto the Labor Party in this matter. If Labor thought that they could sneak this past us, they have another think coming.

This is a highly significant decision by the Rudd government. One of its first acts of office is to try to sneak in a new tax that will increase at a greater rate than the cost of living. Of course, as we often have to do in this place, we have to ask ourselves: who will pay for it? Initially, the sector responsible for moving 75 per cent of Australia’s domestic freight—those who drive the nation’s 365,000 trucks, many of whom are struggling small business operators—will be the ones who will pay for it. The government claims to be concerned about working families and claims to be concerned about small business. Well, truckies have families too. Trucks and the people who operate them are the essence of a small business. Would it have been too much for the government to agree that Australia’s truck drivers have concerns that are every bit as legitimate as those of other small businesses?

I have come across truckies across Australia who are struggling with rising costs. There is one trucking company I know of that uses over a million litres of diesel a month. The extra cost on this million litres of diesel is nearly $14,000. That is $150,000 a year at a time when they are already stretched. That kind of money could go a long way, and anyone in small business would recognise that huge impost that in many cases will send people under. The owner of this trucking company has estimated that the total cost of the diesel hike and the registration charges increase will be in the neighbourhood of $1 million annually. We are not talking budgets here; we are talking about, effectively, a small business. I do not know what sort of small businesses could possibly cop along the side of the head a sudden million dollar bill out of left field and survive. The margins of those trucking companies and organisations that I have had a bit to do with are getting slimmer and slimmer every day, and, as I said, it is going to take very little to tip them over the edge. I think this is a bit of a bulldozer. It will not take anywhere near as much as this to do that. This particular individual employs 250 people—250 families. Indeed, many have already been forced to leave the industry or have already gone broke through other issues.

Unfortunately, the plight of the truckies does not seem to be of any interest to the Labor Party, or to the Transport Workers Union, which has been conspicuous in its silence on an issue that will impact on truckies across Australia. I wonder if there are any Labor senators in the chamber who are members of the TWU. If so, I would invite them to join us and stand up to protect Australian truck drivers.