Ms. Saffioti questions the Minister for Transport, Mr. Nalder, about whether he misled the house regarding prior knowledge of the UberX launch. Mr. Nalder denies misleading the house and defends his stance on the legality and ethics of UberX.

AnsweredQoN 650Legislative Assembly
Asked
20 August 2015
Portfolio
Transport

QuestionView source ↗

UBER TAXI
SERVICE
650. Ms R. SAFFIOTI to the
Minister for Transport:
I have a supplementary question. Given that today the
minister has confirmed he was briefed about the uberX launch before it was
launched —
Mr D.C. Nalder :
No.
Ms R. SAFFIOTI :
That is what the minister just said. The minister was at a meeting on 29 August

The SPEAKER : Just
complete your supplementary. You wait, minister.
Ms R. SAFFIOTI : On
29 August, the minister was briefed about uberX's impending launch and
Uber brought the minister an operating agreement from the US, and the minister
directed his department to see whether that was possible. How can the minister
stand and say that he did not mislead the house when, on Tuesday, the minister
said that he was not briefed on the uberX launch?

AnswerView source ↗

I still stand by what I just said.
Several members interjected.
The SPEAKER :
Members!
Mr D.C. NALDER : Is
there something wrong with my understanding or something?
Mr J.M. Francis interjected.
Mr D.C. NALDER :
She is mixing up all sorts of things, I think.
Mr W.J. Johnston interjected.
The SPEAKER :
Member for Cannington, I call you to order for the first time.
Mr D.C. NALDER : It
is always great when I hear from the member for Cannington, because he always
does it when the opposition starts to lose an argument. He always starts to
attack the man and make it very personal. If he sees his leader being attacked,
he jumps up and makes a point of order. The other day it was a point of order
calling me a racist for suggesting that his leader comes from New South Wales.
Anyway, what I have said is that Uber wanted to explore
whether or not it could fall within the regulatory environment in Western
Australia and it brought a proposal for us to consider. We said that it does
not fit the Australian law. It might meet US regulations and laws, but it does
not here. That was the basis of the meeting. The information that was sent back
outlined the requirements under Western Australian law.
The opposition can draw some conclusion that I was informed
or not informed. I do not remember that I was informed about the launch of
uberX—I stand by that. I also stand by the following, and this is what
I have said in this house over and again: the uberX service is not legal and
people need to take caution if they are using uberX. I have stood by that, and
I have said it all the time. I personally will not use Uber. I have never used
it and will not willingly use Uber, because I have some serious question marks
over the ethics of the organisation. But that is a personal view.
Uber is in just about every jurisdiction in the world and
every jurisdiction in Australia. The community ultimately votes with its feet,
and it is liking it and using it. I am concerned about it but we have to
ensure, firstly, that there is a level playing field in the marketplace.
Secondly, we need to ensure that there is safety for the drivers and safety for
the passengers. That is what I see as the responsibility of this government.
That is what we are doing. We have put it out for community consultation. We
have been working with industry. We continue to engage with passengers in the
CBD. We are speaking with taxidrivers. We are engaging with many people. We
have had over 155 submissions to date on this green paper. We will be looking
to move on this quickly. No other jurisdiction in Australia has taken this as
far as this state has. We are working on it.
Mrs M.H. Roberts :
Sit down!
Mr D.C. NALDER : I
beg your pardon!
We are working on it and we will continue to work on
delivering the right outcome for Western Australia.

Explore WA Government Data

Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.

Explore more