Senate debates

Thursday, 4 December 2008

Interstate Road Transport Charge Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2008; Road Charges Legislation Repeal and Amendment Bill 2008

In Committee

5:38 pm

Photo of Ian MacdonaldIan Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern Australia) Share this | Hansard source

I am not absolutely sure of what Senator Fielding is going to do with all the requested amendments, but he will no doubt tell us so that we do not have to have a division. I will just have one more go at request (4). I am repeating myself, but I just want to make this absolutely clear to Senator Xenophon. The tax is going up to 21c today and we are unhappy about that. We are unhappy about any additional charges on the road transport industry. But we have conceded it because the government have said, ‘We’re going to spend $70 million on it.’ You would not be surprised if I said that we do not always treat everything the government promise to do as accurate. I could give you about 10 examples of that in 10 seconds if it were relevant. We do not always accept that everything they promise is true.

This does not apply today. It applies in four years time. We are just saying to them that the minister cannot issue a determination: ‘Do not even think about it; do not bother about it unless you can demonstrate that you have these 50 additional rest areas a year.’ If we put that in the bill, it will make sure that it happens. The government will know that, if they ever want to get more money out of the trucking industry through the fuel excise, they will have to have done this. It will not come to a vote in the Senate. It will not be an issue. The minister will just know that they should not even try it unless they can demonstrate through some independent authority that the additional rest areas have been provided. I suspect it will be done through Infrastructure Australia. I would not go for the state road transport authority, Senator Conroy. That is like Caesar appealing to Caesar. That is why I think they are good amendments. They will just keep the government to their word. If the government are going to do it, why would they possibly object? We just want to make sure that we are keeping the Bs honest, and this is an easy way of doing it.

Comments

No comments