❓ Mr. Redman raises concerns about potential fee hikes for heavy haulage, while Minister MacTiernan acknowledges the issue but emphasizes the need for cost transparency and states the government won't support such large increases in the short-term.
AnsweredQoN 355Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
Given that the heavy haulage industry in Western Australia is still reeling from the National Transport Commission’s discussion paper, which suggests a rise in B-double road train registration fees from $7 600 to $17 000 a year and triple road train registration fees from $10 000 to $31 000 a year - (1) Will the minister provide an assurance that she will vigorously oppose significant fee hikes at the Australian Transport Council meeting in December? (2) Does the minister concur with the contention of Transport Forum WA that maximum hikes will add $153 to annual household budgets, and proposed new taxes on fuel for heavy vehicles will result in increased transport costs of between five and nine per cent? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for the question, although I do not know whether shoving a copy of it in my hand as I walked into the chamber constitutes giving notice, particularly when the member asked for some detailed information. (1)-(2) I think it is important to understand the context of the question. The federal government fully supports the National Transport Commission investigating the true cost of heavy haulage and the appropriate transparency of that costing process. Many other freight modalities, including the rail transport industry and the shipping transport industry, are very concerned that there is no transparency in the costing for road transport. The endeavours of the National Transport Commission are an attempt to get the real figures out there and on the table. I do not think that any party, particularly one that seeks to present itself as having economic credentials, could object to a process in which the true costs will be identified and published. The question is to what extent one can seek to recover those costs through licensing fees. As I have said on the record time and again, there is no way that this government could support adjustments of the scale mooted by the National Transport Commission within the short to medium period; it would create massive dislocation that no government could support. As we have said before, there is no way that we are proposing increases of that scale in the short to medium term. However, I do believe that we must face up to the reality of what the subsidy to the road transport industry is.
(1) Will the minister provide an assurance that she will vigorously oppose significant fee hikes at the Australian Transport Council meeting in December? (2) Does the minister concur with the contention of Transport Forum WA that maximum hikes will add $153 to annual household budgets, and proposed new taxes on fuel for heavy vehicles will result in increased transport costs of between five and nine per cent? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for the question, although I do not know whether shoving a copy of it in my hand as I walked into the chamber constitutes giving notice, particularly when the member asked for some detailed information. (1)-(2) I think it is important to understand the context of the question. The federal government fully supports the National Transport Commission investigating the true cost of heavy haulage and the appropriate transparency of that costing process. Many other freight modalities, including the rail transport industry and the shipping transport industry, are very concerned that there is no transparency in the costing for road transport. The endeavours of the National Transport Commission are an attempt to get the real figures out there and on the table. I do not think that any party, particularly one that seeks to present itself as having economic credentials, could object to a process in which the true costs will be identified and published. The question is to what extent one can seek to recover those costs through licensing fees. As I have said on the record time and again, there is no way that this government could support adjustments of the scale mooted by the National Transport Commission within the short to medium period; it would create massive dislocation that no government could support. As we have said before, there is no way that we are proposing increases of that scale in the short to medium term. However, I do believe that we must face up to the reality of what the subsidy to the road transport industry is.
(2) Does the minister concur with the contention of Transport Forum WA that maximum hikes will add $153 to annual household budgets, and proposed new taxes on fuel for heavy vehicles will result in increased transport costs of between five and nine per cent? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for the question, although I do not know whether shoving a copy of it in my hand as I walked into the chamber constitutes giving notice, particularly when the member asked for some detailed information. (1)-(2) I think it is important to understand the context of the question. The federal government fully supports the National Transport Commission investigating the true cost of heavy haulage and the appropriate transparency of that costing process. Many other freight modalities, including the rail transport industry and the shipping transport industry, are very concerned that there is no transparency in the costing for road transport. The endeavours of the National Transport Commission are an attempt to get the real figures out there and on the table. I do not think that any party, particularly one that seeks to present itself as having economic credentials, could object to a process in which the true costs will be identified and published. The question is to what extent one can seek to recover those costs through licensing fees. As I have said on the record time and again, there is no way that this government could support adjustments of the scale mooted by the National Transport Commission within the short to medium period; it would create massive dislocation that no government could support. As we have said before, there is no way that we are proposing increases of that scale in the short to medium term. However, I do believe that we must face up to the reality of what the subsidy to the road transport industry is.
Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for the question, although I do not know whether shoving a copy of it in my hand as I walked into the chamber constitutes giving notice, particularly when the member asked for some detailed information. (1)-(2) I think it is important to understand the context of the question. The federal government fully supports the National Transport Commission investigating the true cost of heavy haulage and the appropriate transparency of that costing process. Many other freight modalities, including the rail transport industry and the shipping transport industry, are very concerned that there is no transparency in the costing for road transport. The endeavours of the National Transport Commission are an attempt to get the real figures out there and on the table. I do not think that any party, particularly one that seeks to present itself as having economic credentials, could object to a process in which the true costs will be identified and published. The question is to what extent one can seek to recover those costs through licensing fees. As I have said on the record time and again, there is no way that this government could support adjustments of the scale mooted by the National Transport Commission within the short to medium period; it would create massive dislocation that no government could support. As we have said before, there is no way that we are proposing increases of that scale in the short to medium term. However, I do believe that we must face up to the reality of what the subsidy to the road transport industry is.
I thank the member for the question, although I do not know whether shoving a copy of it in my hand as I walked into the chamber constitutes giving notice, particularly when the member asked for some detailed information. (1)-(2) I think it is important to understand the context of the question. The federal government fully supports the National Transport Commission investigating the true cost of heavy haulage and the appropriate transparency of that costing process. Many other freight modalities, including the rail transport industry and the shipping transport industry, are very concerned that there is no transparency in the costing for road transport. The endeavours of the National Transport Commission are an attempt to get the real figures out there and on the table. I do not think that any party, particularly one that seeks to present itself as having economic credentials, could object to a process in which the true costs will be identified and published. The question is to what extent one can seek to recover those costs through licensing fees. As I have said on the record time and again, there is no way that this government could support adjustments of the scale mooted by the National Transport Commission within the short to medium period; it would create massive dislocation that no government could support. As we have said before, there is no way that we are proposing increases of that scale in the short to medium term. However, I do believe that we must face up to the reality of what the subsidy to the road transport industry is.
(1)-(2) I think it is important to understand the context of the question. The federal government fully supports the National Transport Commission investigating the true cost of heavy haulage and the appropriate transparency of that costing process. Many other freight modalities, including the rail transport industry and the shipping transport industry, are very concerned that there is no transparency in the costing for road transport. The endeavours of the National Transport Commission are an attempt to get the real figures out there and on the table. I do not think that any party, particularly one that seeks to present itself as having economic credentials, could object to a process in which the true costs will be identified and published. The question is to what extent one can seek to recover those costs through licensing fees. As I have said on the record time and again, there is no way that this government could support adjustments of the scale mooted by the National Transport Commission within the short to medium period; it would create massive dislocation that no government could support. As we have said before, there is no way that we are proposing increases of that scale in the short to medium term. However, I do believe that we must face up to the reality of what the subsidy to the road transport industry is.
(1) Will the minister provide an assurance that she will vigorously oppose significant fee hikes at the Australian Transport Council meeting in December? (2) Does the minister concur with the contention of Transport Forum WA that maximum hikes will add $153 to annual household budgets, and proposed new taxes on fuel for heavy vehicles will result in increased transport costs of between five and nine per cent? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for the question, although I do not know whether shoving a copy of it in my hand as I walked into the chamber constitutes giving notice, particularly when the member asked for some detailed information. (1)-(2) I think it is important to understand the context of the question. The federal government fully supports the National Transport Commission investigating the true cost of heavy haulage and the appropriate transparency of that costing process. Many other freight modalities, including the rail transport industry and the shipping transport industry, are very concerned that there is no transparency in the costing for road transport. The endeavours of the National Transport Commission are an attempt to get the real figures out there and on the table. I do not think that any party, particularly one that seeks to present itself as having economic credentials, could object to a process in which the true costs will be identified and published. The question is to what extent one can seek to recover those costs through licensing fees. As I have said on the record time and again, there is no way that this government could support adjustments of the scale mooted by the National Transport Commission within the short to medium period; it would create massive dislocation that no government could support. As we have said before, there is no way that we are proposing increases of that scale in the short to medium term. However, I do believe that we must face up to the reality of what the subsidy to the road transport industry is.
(2) Does the minister concur with the contention of Transport Forum WA that maximum hikes will add $153 to annual household budgets, and proposed new taxes on fuel for heavy vehicles will result in increased transport costs of between five and nine per cent? Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for the question, although I do not know whether shoving a copy of it in my hand as I walked into the chamber constitutes giving notice, particularly when the member asked for some detailed information. (1)-(2) I think it is important to understand the context of the question. The federal government fully supports the National Transport Commission investigating the true cost of heavy haulage and the appropriate transparency of that costing process. Many other freight modalities, including the rail transport industry and the shipping transport industry, are very concerned that there is no transparency in the costing for road transport. The endeavours of the National Transport Commission are an attempt to get the real figures out there and on the table. I do not think that any party, particularly one that seeks to present itself as having economic credentials, could object to a process in which the true costs will be identified and published. The question is to what extent one can seek to recover those costs through licensing fees. As I have said on the record time and again, there is no way that this government could support adjustments of the scale mooted by the National Transport Commission within the short to medium period; it would create massive dislocation that no government could support. As we have said before, there is no way that we are proposing increases of that scale in the short to medium term. However, I do believe that we must face up to the reality of what the subsidy to the road transport industry is.
Ms A.J.G. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for the question, although I do not know whether shoving a copy of it in my hand as I walked into the chamber constitutes giving notice, particularly when the member asked for some detailed information. (1)-(2) I think it is important to understand the context of the question. The federal government fully supports the National Transport Commission investigating the true cost of heavy haulage and the appropriate transparency of that costing process. Many other freight modalities, including the rail transport industry and the shipping transport industry, are very concerned that there is no transparency in the costing for road transport. The endeavours of the National Transport Commission are an attempt to get the real figures out there and on the table. I do not think that any party, particularly one that seeks to present itself as having economic credentials, could object to a process in which the true costs will be identified and published. The question is to what extent one can seek to recover those costs through licensing fees. As I have said on the record time and again, there is no way that this government could support adjustments of the scale mooted by the National Transport Commission within the short to medium period; it would create massive dislocation that no government could support. As we have said before, there is no way that we are proposing increases of that scale in the short to medium term. However, I do believe that we must face up to the reality of what the subsidy to the road transport industry is.
I thank the member for the question, although I do not know whether shoving a copy of it in my hand as I walked into the chamber constitutes giving notice, particularly when the member asked for some detailed information. (1)-(2) I think it is important to understand the context of the question. The federal government fully supports the National Transport Commission investigating the true cost of heavy haulage and the appropriate transparency of that costing process. Many other freight modalities, including the rail transport industry and the shipping transport industry, are very concerned that there is no transparency in the costing for road transport. The endeavours of the National Transport Commission are an attempt to get the real figures out there and on the table. I do not think that any party, particularly one that seeks to present itself as having economic credentials, could object to a process in which the true costs will be identified and published. The question is to what extent one can seek to recover those costs through licensing fees. As I have said on the record time and again, there is no way that this government could support adjustments of the scale mooted by the National Transport Commission within the short to medium period; it would create massive dislocation that no government could support. As we have said before, there is no way that we are proposing increases of that scale in the short to medium term. However, I do believe that we must face up to the reality of what the subsidy to the road transport industry is.
(1)-(2) I think it is important to understand the context of the question. The federal government fully supports the National Transport Commission investigating the true cost of heavy haulage and the appropriate transparency of that costing process. Many other freight modalities, including the rail transport industry and the shipping transport industry, are very concerned that there is no transparency in the costing for road transport. The endeavours of the National Transport Commission are an attempt to get the real figures out there and on the table. I do not think that any party, particularly one that seeks to present itself as having economic credentials, could object to a process in which the true costs will be identified and published. The question is to what extent one can seek to recover those costs through licensing fees. As I have said on the record time and again, there is no way that this government could support adjustments of the scale mooted by the National Transport Commission within the short to medium period; it would create massive dislocation that no government could support. As we have said before, there is no way that we are proposing increases of that scale in the short to medium term. However, I do believe that we must face up to the reality of what the subsidy to the road transport industry is.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.