Road Safety Remuneration Order

Mr PISONI (Unley) (14:29): My question is to the Minister for Transport. After today's demonstration by owner-drivers against the Road Safety Remuneration Tribunal's introduction of minimum rates from 4 April, will the minister now join with the federal government to support the Australian Industry Group and other driver associations who have applied to have the start date for minimum rates pushed out to 1 January 2017?

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN (Lee—Minister for Transport and Infrastructure, Minister for Housing and Urban Development) (14:30): I thank the member for Unley for his question. I know that he's shown some interest in this issue in recent weeks. The member for Unley was partially correct in one of the assertions that he made in his question about referring to the federal government, because this is a matter which is within the purview of the commonwealth jurisdiction, and in particular the commonwealth government. I'm glad that today—

Mr Gardner interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Morialta is warned.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: —22 March 2016, can be the day that the state opposition has finally found its voice to speak up against the federal Coalition government. They let it go with the automotive industry, they let it go with the submarines, they let it go with health funding, they let it go with education funding. It's just a shame, Mr Speaker—

Mr Pisoni interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Unley is warned.

Ms CHAPMAN: Point of order, sir: this—

The Hon. A. Koutsantonis interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The Treasurer is called to order.

Ms CHAPMAN: This was a simple question, sir, as to whether the government supports—

The SPEAKER: What's the point of order?

Ms CHAPMAN: Relevance to the question of supporting the extension until 1 January.

The SPEAKER: Yes, alright, I uphold the point of order. Minister.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. In terms of how this matter may be resolved, it's my understanding that there was some contemplation at the federal level, particularly over the last couple of years, about whether the federal Coalition government would be moving to repeal the legislation which established the Road Safety Remuneration Tribunal, but, of course, given the fact that the tribunal still exists, clearly they haven't.

Mr Pisoni: They don't have the numbers in the Senate, that's why.

The SPEAKER: The member for Unley is warned for the second and the final time.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: The member for Unley says it's because they don't have the numbers in the Senate and that's why they haven't tried it on. It's funny, because there seems to be a lot of conjecture around about whether they'll try it on with other industrial relations-type legislation—the ABCC—and, apparently, whether that's a trigger for a double dissolution election. So, when it comes to taking this issue seriously, I don't think that the member for Unley can claim that his federal Coalition party counterparts are indeed paying it the attention that he wishes they would.

In terms of how this issue may be examined and resolved, of course the member for Unley should be aware that the tribunal continues to sit; in fact, the last advice I had was not only did they have sitting dates that extended throughout the period of this working week but they were prepared to sit through the Easter long weekend period—

Mr Pisoni interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Unley will withdraw for the remainder of question time under the sessional order.

The honourable member for Unley having withdrawn from the chamber:

The SPEAKER: Minister.

The Hon. S.C. MULLIGHAN: As I was saying, the tribunal continues to sit. They continue to receive submissions from trucking companies, employer representatives, as they do employee representatives. That is the jurisdiction in which this will be resolved. As for my views, as I said in the last sitting week of parliament, I certainly support the principle about which this tribunal was established and what it aims is to achieve. Of course I share the concerns of the trucking industry if they have legitimate fears about the impact of this, and that's why the tribunal continues to sit, to hear and to weigh these arguments, not just about whether there should be an order made and enforced but about the timing of the implementation of that order, which I understand is the nub of the issue which is being raised by industry.