Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Government in the Senate) Share this | Hansard source

I indicate on behalf of the government that we will not be supporting request (1), we are happy to support (2) and we will not be supporting (3) or (4). I will briefly speak to our position on those as a collective. Request (4) has ambiguous terminology and lacks detail. For example, ‘other charges’ could be interpreted to include tolls and environmental charges that are not related to road construction costs. The NTC uses a seven-year averaging of road expenditure to soften the impact of spikes in road funding, strongly supported by industry. This amendment jeopardises that. It is unnecessary: all information associated with the charges, including precise definitions, will be defined in the determination and consultation process.

The government has identified rest stops as an important issue for the industry and moved to act. The government has already committed, with the passage of this bill, to a $70 million heavy vehicle safety and productivity package which will provide heavy vehicle rest stops. The minister has already written to industry and the states seeking their views as to where the rest stops should be. Those submissions have been provided. It is bad policy to link adjustment of the charge in the future to the construction of an arbitrary number of rest stops. The road user charge is determined based on all road expenditure attributable to heavy vehicles, not just rest stops. Also, putting in an arbitrary quantitative target such as 50 only encourages expenditure on smaller projects to meet the target. There is no logic or transparency to why 50 a year has been chosen.

Claiming that this bill can force the states to harmonise inconsistent transport law is an absolute furphy. There is no logical reason to link road user charge adjustment to harmonisation of transport law. This process has absolutely no impact on the states and will place no pressure on states at all. All the revenue from this bill comes to the Commonwealth. The Rudd government is pursuing national transport law in the heavy vehicle area through the ministerial council process.

It is not the role of Infrastructure Australia to audit the construction of heavy vehicle rest stops or the extent of harmonisation of transport law. IA is a very small body whose purpose is to give high-level strategic advice to the government on its infrastructure agenda. It is currently preparing the priority list for infrastructure projects of national significance. It is made up of eminent business leaders with significant strategic policy experience. Can senators seriously envisage Rod Eddington, Heather Ridout, Mark Birrell and Gary Weaven measuring up rest stops with tape measures on the nation’s highways to see if they comply with the NTC guidelines?