Bills

Passenger Transport (Point to Point Transport Services) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading (resumed on motion).

The Hon. D.G. PISONI (Unley) (15:53): I am resuming the remarks about the bill that I began making prior to the lunch break. I am getting to my closing remarks. There are some issues of confidentiality that have been raised by stakeholders and those who are engaged in the industry about where the bill contains provisions that could allow government agencies to withhold certain industry information. Of course, they are concerned that it would limit transparency, and I think it is important that we all understand that information is key when you are running a business and want to have an understanding of what data is available about your industry to help you improve your own business. It is very important, and it certainly would be disappointing if those in the industry were denied access to data or other industry information that the government may be using in making its decisions.

The Taxi Council has raised concerns that these confidentiality measures could be used to restrict access to key registry data, making it harder for industry stakeholders to advocate for changes as well—so not only information to support you to run your business as robustly and profitably as possible but also about advocacy opportunities as well.

Without safeguards this provision could allow future regulatory decisions to be made with limited public scrutiny. I would imagine there would be very few people who at some stage in their lives have not used point-to-point transport, whether it be taxis or whether it be ridesharing services. I think that will grow with the success of this bill where we see it expanded into the regions.

We no longer have to wait for an organised tour, or book a driver all day for a visit to a region. I would imagine that what the effect of this bill will be is there will be locally-based drivers. You would take a driver from your hotel, where you might be staying in Adelaide as a tourist, out to a specific region in South Australia and when it's time to come home again there would be somebody living locally who would take you back to Adelaide. So there would be no need for a driver to be sitting idle for the several hours that you might be at lunch or visiting various interesting tourist sites.

In conclusion, the Passenger Transport (Point to Point Transport Services) Amendment Bill 2025 introduces sweeping changes to South Australia's transport industry, with some stakeholders feeling that they have had insufficient time to consider the proposed legislation. You can understand that. There is always hesitation when change is coming through and it is important when change comes through that people are comfortable with that, they understand it and they can move comfortably into that changed situation.

The minister has been given significant discretionary power over licensing accreditation and fare controls without mandatory industry consultation or independent oversight. I think that is a concern. We on this side of the chamber certainly think that is a concern, because we all know that government does not know best and that you get a better outcome when you consult those involved in the industry. You would not make significant changes for a community without consulting that community; why would you not consult the industry if you were making changes to that industry? The doubling of the transport levy will directly increase passenger costs, and future increases can be made without parliamentary approval. We have seen that happen on previous occasions where increases have come out of the blue without any warning. And, of course, there is no provision for a review or a sunset clause.

There are questions that the buyback scheme may not provide adequate compensation for longstanding taxi operators, leaving many at risk of financial hardship. I think this is the most difficult one for the taxi owners that own the perpetual plates, because they are not being recognised as making that investment. I think you always expect to lose money when you sell a luxury item that you have enjoyed for a number of years, but this is an investment that was made for a business and then all of a sudden that business becomes worthless, and through no fault of the person who made that investment, whether it was 10, 20 or 30 years ago. Not only have they forgone any capital growth in that investment that they have made, in some instances they are not even getting the money back that they paid. When you factor in inflation on top of that, they are a long way behind.

Just imagine how it would have looked: it simply would not have happened if the compulsory acquisitions for the north-south corridor were based on a fraction of the value of those properties; it just would not happen. As a matter of fact, it cannot happen because there are laws to protect people from that. So I do not understand why an asset, such as a taxi licence, is treated differently to any other property that is being acquired for the public good. I think there is no doubt this is legislation that is for the public good in the longer term but there seems to be an unfair advantage, particularly for those who may have second or third licences, only receiving $10,000 for those licences.

Of course, the lack of transparency in vehicle camera requirements and confidential provisions raise serious concerns about privacy and regulatory fairness. I touched on that earlier in remarks I was making about what the safeguards are about vision being used inappropriately and breaching of people's privacy. So we principally support this legislation, but we do reserve our right to consider amendments to deal with some of these issues that have been highlighted in the speech when the bill is debated in the Legislative Council.

Mr BROWN (Florey) (16:01): I rise in support of the Passenger Transport (Point to Point Transport Services) Amendment Bill 2025. The bill proposes to amend the Passenger Transport Act 1994 in order to implement key recommendations arising out of last year's review of the act. The Malinauskas government made a commitment before being elected to undertake this review and work with industry, stakeholders and consumers towards undertaking important reforms across the point-to-point passenger transport sector. The bill before us represents the fulfilment of that commitment. The bill also seeks to implement elements of the taxi industry support package approved as part of the state budget in 2024-25.

Members may be aware that the category of point-to-point transport includes any service that is provided in a vehicle with 12 seats or fewer, including the driver, that can take customers on a route that they choose at a time that suits them in exchange for the payment of a fare. This includes taxis, chauffeurs and ride-sourcing or rideshare services.

As part of the review of the act last year, the Department for Infrastructure and Transport consulted with key industry and private consumer stakeholders through a YourSAy survey, one-on-one industry meetings and written submissions. The consultation phase yielded a total of 116 YourSAy survey responses, with 41 respondents (35 per cent) identifying themselves as a point-to-point driver, owner or operator, and 75 respondents (65 per cent) identifying themselves as point-to-point customers. Sixty written submissions were received from industry members and eight submissions were received from consumers.

On 30 August 2024, the government released the review, which put forward 29 recommendations informed by the feedback that was received from industry, customers and key stakeholders. The reason that the Malinauskas government came to office with a commitment to undertake a review of the current point-to-point passenger transport regime is because it was widely recognised, especially within the sector, that change was greatly needed. There is no question as to whether this sector is experiencing significant challenges.

In particular, we have heard from taxi stakeholders, including through the review process, about the profound impact of the introduction of rideshare and the changes to the industry that this introduction has brought about. The bill seeks to deliver important taxi industry support, including proposing to remove the limit on the number of taxis that can operate, thereby reducing a barrier to entry to the sector; removing the requirement for a perpetual licence to operate a taxi; and introducing an uncapped annual licence regime.

The bill also provides for the state government to deliver compensation to the taxi industry, with eligible licence holders to receive $200,000 for the first metropolitan taxi licence held and $10,000 for each subsequent licence, up to a total of six licences. In addition, the bill proposes that anyone who is not eligible, and has their perpetual licence cancelled, will receive $10,000 compensation.

Access taxi licence holders will receive $100,000 for their first licence and $10,000 for each subsequent licence. These measures will be funded in part by an increase in the point-to-point transport service transaction levy, which was put in place after the introduction of rideshare in 2017. Its purpose is to help fund assistance packages to metropolitan taxi licence holders and lessees to help them transition to a new regulatory model.

The levy further supports reduced or waived annual fees for passenger transport services, along with other industry initiatives such as additional compliance officers and a lifting fee for people with disability who use a wheelchair or large mobility device and as a result require travel in an accessible taxi. The bill enables the levy to be set by regulation to enable indexation increases to occur as required. The bill also seeks to strengthen the collection arrangements for the levy.

The bill further proposes to introduce a simpler accreditation model which aims to reduce unnecessary complexity and to enable more effective regulation of current and emerging business models. It proposes three accreditation types: firstly, booking service providers; secondly, general passenger transport service providers; and finally, passenger transport drivers.

A booking service is a point-to-point transport service to which requests are made by members of the public and those requests are assigned to a driver or to a vehicle. General passenger transport service providers will apply to services that require accreditation but should not be required to meet the same obligations as booking service providers, including being subject to the responsibility for payment of the levy. Driver accreditation will broadly continue as it currently operates. Vehicles will need to be authorised under the new framework to provide a passenger transport service. To hold authorisation, vehicles will need to meet prescribed standards, including identification and safety requirements.

The bill seeks to strengthen compliance and enforcement arrangements by introducing new offences and automatic suspension and cancellation of accreditation in prescribed circumstances. A driver will automatically have their passenger transport driver accreditation suspended, for example, in the event they do not hold a current driver's licence. The bill also provides that a person's accreditation will be cancelled in the event that they have committed a prescribed offence, that they have breached the general safety duty or that they no longer meet the requirements to hold the relevant type of accreditation.

The bill seeks to enhance safety for drivers and for passengers by introducing a general safety duty with similar principles as those reflected in the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 and the Heavy Vehicle National Law (South Australia) Act. This introduces a legal requirement to eliminate or minimise the risk of incidents involving death, injury or damage and to encourage the development, maintenance and continuous improvement of work safety practices. This duty will apply to those who fall within the chain of responsibility for providing a passenger transport service other than public transport, including the service provider, the driver and the holder of the vehicle authorisation.

The bill further includes provisions to enable the minister to prescribe passenger transport vehicle standards and fleet standards, provisions to enable two separate metropolitan boundaries for point-to-point and public transport services to ensure they can be individually adjusted to respond to community needs over time and provisions to establish a stronger compliance and audit framework with authorised officers having clearer compliance and investigation powers enabling swift action to be taken for expiable offences such as non-taxi point-to-point vehicles running a meter or stopping in a taxi rank. The bill will also allow for audits to assess compliance with obligations under the act, including correct payment of the levy.

The bill further proposes to provide greater customer protection from practices that amount to price gouging by prohibiting surge pricing or a queue-jumping fee in certain prescribed circumstances. Currently, rideshare operators have the ability to charge surge price fares according to supply and demand. The bill seeks to prohibit price gouging in the event of a declared emergency. The introduction of this prohibition aligns with arrangements in place in a number of other jurisdictions.

The bill proposes to insert new data and information exchange provisions to assist compliance, with the minister to determine arrangements for sharing prescribed information. Consumer protection will be strengthened through addressing fraudulent and noncompliant behaviours. It is intended to increase penalties for unscrupulous practices such as the refusal to turn on meters and the use of illegal EFTPOS machines. Cracking down on these behaviours by dodgy vehicle operators will benefit users of point-to-point transport services and reflect positively on those operators who do the right thing, increasing confidence in the industry.

These reforms are aimed at making meaningful improvements in the regulation of services within the point-to-point transport industry with fundamental changes that seek to address current circumstances for taxi licence holders, as well as to improve service availability for users. These reforms also seek to strengthen safety across the industry, with the recognition that many of the safety issues addressed are common to both taxis and rideshare vehicles.

As promised, and in response to the clear need for change, the Passenger Transport Act 1994—having been subject to thorough review—will, with the passage of this bill, be subject to meaningful amendment. The Department for Infrastructure and Transport has worked with industry, consumers and stakeholders to progress changes in line with key recommendations arising from the review. I am pleased to commend this bill to the house.

Mrs HURN (Schubert) (16:10): I, too, rise to speak on the Passenger Transport (Point to Point Transport Services) Amendment Bill 2025 and I thank the member for Unley for his very comprehensive contribution as lead speaker for the opposition. This bill, as has been outlined by a number of speakers, has been created in response to recommendations of a review into the Passenger Transport Act by the government and I am pleased to have an opportunity to speak on it.

It was just last Friday that I wrote to the Premier to alert him of the fact that this bill does include something really significant for my local community because it does relate to the geographical boundaries of rideshare, allowing it to operate in regional communities like the Barossa, and that it was really essential for my community that it was dealt with ahead of Gather Round, which is coming to the Barossa Valley in April. I am pleased to see that today it has been lifted higher on the government's priority list in response to my letter, but I still do have concerns about how little time there is left for it to pass and, importantly for rideshare companies, to really act upon the changes before Gather Round and other major events in the Barossa—but I will elaborate on that a little bit further in a moment.

Access to transport in my electorate is a really key issue because we do have a real lack of connectivity between our towns, not just for local people wanting to go about their business but, importantly for a world-class region like the Barossa, we want tourists to be able to get out and explore all of what makes our region so fantastic. It seemed to me that when rideshare companies like Uber are already able to operate in regions like the Adelaide Hills, McLaren Vale, Mount Barker and Gawler, and in the city, it would be a natural extension to allow these services to operate within the Barossa as well, just to help alleviate some of those pressures.

In addition to expanding the transport offering in the Barossa, this change is also going to boost employment opportunities. I have spoken with so many people in my electorate who are either interested in becoming a rideshare driver themselves, or they have people in their life who are excited at the prospect of being able to pick up a little bit of work over the weekend or in those peak periods. Speaking of locals, you would know this all too well, Mr Deputy Speaker, but with the Concordia development on the horizon we have an influx of 25,000 people coming to our region over the next decade and, naturally, these residents too would expect to get around in a way that is smart, efficient, quick and safe.

Transport, as I have mentioned, is a big issue in the Barossa and we do need to have more ways to connect people, both locals and visitors alike. We want locals to be able to get from A to B safely and efficiently. We want visitors to be able to get out and enjoy all of what makes our region so fantastic. Importantly, these changes bring the Barossa in line with all those other places I have mentioned in South Australia.

You only need to look right across the world and there are countless examples of where rideshare companies operate side by side with our taxis—who do a remarkable job—and they do, I think, provide a complementary service to one another. I think this would be a big win for local businesses and locals alike. I have been inundated with positive feedback from local businesses in particular, as we are heading into Gather Round, that there will be more transport options for people to explore our region.

My electorate did show support for this proposed change when just two years ago I launched a survey asking people a very simple question: would you like to see rideshare companies like Uber able to operate in the Barossa? Members in this house would appreciate that sometimes when you throw out a survey to your local community you might get a handful of responses back. Sometimes you might get a couple of hundred. For me, on this issue I had nearly 3,000 people respond to my survey, and it was so overwhelming.

More than 95 per cent of those respondents said they wanted to see rideshare options in the Barossa. That meant only 5 per cent of people did not support the move. I can appreciate that many of those people opposed to the suggestion were in the taxi industry. I appreciate that this is a difficult change, as has been very well articulated by the member for Unley in his earlier remarks, but it was such an overwhelming result for my community. As I say, it is really not that surprising for a wine region like the Barossa that people are looking for more options and an increase in service to get them from A to B.

Receiving this feedback was really the catalyst for me proactively pursuing this with the government. I went to the Minister for Transport on multiple occasions, outlining to him what my community were saying on the ground. I outlined these survey results to him, and I pushed with the Premier that this was so critical ahead of Gather Round, and here we are today.

Some of the main themes that came through my survey response were that it would be a boost to the local economy; businesses would benefit and there would be increased visitation on the ground; better transport options, which I have mentioned; better transport availability; and of course reducing the risk of drink driving on our roads.

When you come to a place like the Barossa, you are expecting to try some of our world-class wines—and there are a number. We do a fantastic bold Barossa shiraz. After you have had a few schlucks, as the Barossa Deutsche would say, you need safe transport options to get around. This is about not just having an increase in services and options but ensuring that people can enjoy all of what makes our region fantastic, safely. There are also the employment opportunities, which I have already mentioned.

In the course of providing my remarks, I wanted to share with the house some of the responses that I received from locals. Alex from Nuriootpa said:

Allowing rideshare would open up a significant source of transport in the area, as well as create a number of jobs for those looking to be drivers.

Alice from Tanunda said:

It would be great to be able to travel between our small towns not serviced by public transport.

David from Lyndoch said:

It would allow our youth and elderly more options of getting to appointments, work, functions rather than trying to rely on a non-existent public transport system. And when available…

Ally from Angaston said:

Better and safer transportation opportunities. Brings employment opportunities to the region. Easier for tourists to get around.

Alyssa from Wynn Vale, outside of the electorate, in the member for Wright's electorate, a tourist who responded to my survey—I had a few of those—said:

More likely to visit the Barossa region as will have access to transport options.

That could have been the member for Wright himself, who participated in my survey. Courtney from Nuriootpa said:

Would allow for better transport options, can give people employment opportunities, whether that's becoming the driver or the accessing of the rideshare to get to their place of employment.

Laura from Angaston said:

Ease of transportation between venues/accommodation for tourists. My son could get an Uber to Gawler for the train to the city. Safer roads with less possible drink driving.

Sarah from Williamstown said:

Staff should not have to transport patrons, and elderly people are always relying on the kindness of neighbours at times…which is difficult.

Jo from Stockwell said:

More tourists and locals eating/staying in our community instead of going to Adelaide.

Bobby from Light Pass said:

Rideshare would make the whole Barossa accessible for locals and tourists alike, it increases the appeal of regional living and introduces more employment options for our children.

Kim from Mount Pleasant said:

Encourage people to more unexplored areas, such as Keyneton/Eden Valley.

Lisa from Springton said:

Better transport options and more affordable transport. I have one bus service to an interchange in the morning and one in the afternoon. There is no transport flexibility.

Giles from Eden Valley said:

The existing public transport infrastructure in the Barossa doesn't meet the needs of a region that prides itself on food and beverage experiences. This contributes to a lack of accessibility for tourists, a lack of transport for young hospitality workers and sadly too much drink driving.

Courtney from Bethany said:

Making our towns accessible. Being 25 and wanting to go out to other local towns and events that the Barossa holds, limits the opportunities to purchase and support businesses as we cannot get around. Not having affordable or accessible transport in the Barossa, means we do not go out of our local town limits.

Emitty from Angaston said:

I know I would go out more within the Barossa if there was an easier option like Uber.

Those are just a handful of the 3,000 comments that I had speaking in support of Uber. I could read them all out; they were all of that similar ilk.

Having pursued this for two years, I was naturally really delighted when the minister announced that he agreed with me and made these changes and announced that the government would expand the metropolitan boundary to allow these services in the Barossa Valley, particularly ahead of the Gather Round event, which I have already mentioned, and of course another Vintage Festival which we have on this year.

However, as the months rolled on and there was really no practical action to see this implemented, I did start to get really worried. It has now been seven months since the government first announced their intention to allow these rideshare services like Uber in the Barossa Valley, and since then my office has been inundated with phone calls asking, 'When is it going to be rolled out?' and 'What should I tell people who are calling me ahead of Gather Round about how they can get around?' I have had some accommodation business owners call me saying that they are wanting to pre-book taxis and that has not necessarily been an option. Businesses are just wanting that certainty that rideshare will be available. Every time I have an event, without fail someone asks me about it.

I have said previously in this house, and I articulated it to the Premier in my correspondence on Friday, that this really could be a small regulatory change to make it happen now. The reason I say this is because I had a Zoom meeting with Uber representatives last week. They talked me through the process and what is required to onboard local drivers, and it is quite a significant one as you would expect. It is not some magic genie in a bottle that you can rub and all of a sudden these local drivers come out and can help get people from A to B. It takes time to onboard local drivers.

In other states where rideshare companies have launched in specific regions, they have said that it takes months to get drivers. I am really worried about what the Gather Round could look like and I am urging the Premier to consider moving this out of the legislation, or at least looking within the existing legislation, and at a stroke of a pen allowing Uber to operate right now.

We are on the brink of Gather Round. I think one of the reasons I am so concerned about this is because I want our local businesses to make the most of the opportunity that Gather Round presents. We have 10,000 people coming to Lyndoch on two days over a weekend. One game on Saturday, one game on Sunday—10,000 people. We have 12 or thereabouts taxis that are able to operate in the Barossa. If you do the maths with that, that is going to make things pretty challenging.

I appreciate that there are things that are being spruiked, like shuttle buses, but I do not want the Gather Round just to be a case of fantastic tourists coming to Gawler via the train, hopping on a bus to Lyndoch and then heading back to the city. I want them to make the most of what this opportunity presents, businesses want this for themselves as well, and I think that the least we can do is make sure that there is enough time to ensure that rolling out this significant change is successful.

Time is a ticking. I appreciate the wheels of change can sometimes be challenging, but in this case I believe they are moving far too slowly. It is time to really get this show on the road and make sure that we have rideshare rolled out in a really successful way that can complement what our local taxi companies are already providing to the people of the Barossa Valley.

We are already seeing it in Mount Barker, the Adelaide Hills, Gawler, the city and McLaren Vale. Why not speed this process up and get it into the Barossa as soon as possible? I do not want our region to be left red-faced. I do not want the government to be left red-faced when businesses are saying that they were unable to make the most of the anticipated economic benefit that could be flowing from Gather Round.

I know that there are a few other elements of this bill, but our lead speaker, the member for Unley, has articulated our position on those and gone through them in quite some depth, so I will leave my remarks there. I am looking forward to continuing to work with the Premier on ensuring that we have transport options not just for the Gather Round but for local people in my community all year round over the years ahead.

Ms O'HANLON (Dunstan) (16:25): I rise today to support the Passenger Transport (Point to Point Transport Services) Amendment Bill 2025. This bill represents a significant step forward in reflecting the new modern passenger transport industry and addressing longstanding challenges that have affected both service providers and customers.

The Department for Infrastructure and Transport conducted an extensive review of our point-to-point transport sector, consulting widely with industry stakeholders, private consumers and relevant government agencies. The review aimed to look at how we transition the taxi industry into a fit-for-purpose service for the modern times. It focused on safety of drivers and passengers, and many of us have heard terrible experiences had by both drivers and passengers up until now.

Their findings, released in August 2024, paint a clear picture of an industry in need of reform and are reflected in the bill before us. To be direct about what we are facing, we have a taxi industry operating under outdated regulations that no longer serve our community's needs. There are over 5,500 rideshare vehicles operating alongside 1,035 general taxis and 102 access taxis, each service under different rules and requirements.

This regulatory disparity on taxi licences and the expense of providing one service as opposed to another has created an uneven playing field that benefits neither drivers nor passengers, for example, taxis not being available when we need them—I dare say most of us have experience coming out of an event and there not being taxis available at the taxi rank—or rideshare showing one wait time before it is booked then immediately turning into a much longer wait time as soon as you click to book the ride.

Most concerning, though, are the persistent issues affecting our most vulnerable citizens. Each month, more than 500 people with disabilities are forced to wait over 30 minutes for an access taxi. This is simply unacceptable. These are not just statistics: these are real people trying to go about their daily lives, attend medical appointments or participate in community activities.

This bill proposes several crucial reforms identified by the review. First, we will transition to an annual licensing regime for taxis, removing the artificial cap on metropolitan taxi numbers. This is a significant change, but this government is not leaving the industry to fend for itself. The bill implements a comprehensive taxi industry reform package that includes a buyback scheme offering, as has been said, $200,000 for first licence holders and $10,000 for subsequent licences up to six licences. To support this transition, we will increase the point-to-point transport service transaction levy by $1 and utilise a portion of the Adelaide Airport service fee. This ensures the reforms are funded sustainably.

The bill also addresses the critical issue of accessible transport. We are implementing a market sounding process to identify new service delivery models for wheelchair-accessible transport. The status quo, where hundreds of vulnerable citizens face extended waiting times, cannot continue. Furthermore, we are removing the metropolitan boundary restrictions. As has been so well articulated by the member for Schubert, they have limited service availability in regional areas. This change will allow point-to-point operators to serve communities beyond Adelaide, improving transport options across our state and indeed benefiting the regional economy.

I acknowledge these reforms will bring significant change to an industry that has operated under the same model for decades, but change is necessary. The current system, with its stark regulatory differences between taxis and rideshare services, its artificial supply constraints and its failing accessible transport model, is no longer serving our community effectively. This bill strikes a careful balance between industry transition and consumer protection. It maintains essential requirements while creating a level playing field. It preserves the taxi industry's exclusive rights to rank and hail services while opening up new opportunities for innovation and improved service delivery.

The reforms before us today are not just about updating regulations, they are about ensuring every South Australian has access to reliable, safe and efficient transport services. They are about supporting an industry through necessary change while protecting the interests of vulnerable consumers. I commend this bill to the house.

Mr WHETSTONE (Chaffey) (16:29): I rise to support in principle the Passenger Transport (Point to Point Transport Services) Amendment Bill. As a regional MP, I have significant interest in the limited access to public transport services currently, and how rideshare could diversify to service what I would consider an ailing need for the people in Chaffey.

Chaffey is about three hours from Adelaide and it has enormous deficiencies when it comes to public transport. We have a skeleton bus service within working hours up in the Riverland. What it does is really disadvantage people from accessing public transport. The taxi industry has been of service with the limited number of taxis, as the member for Schubert has rightfully said. The taxi numbers are finite to service a rural setting that is quite spread out. I know myself, over a long period of time, if I want to access a cab from where I live into one of the towns it can be anywhere from $50 to $100 each way.

That is quite prohibitive for many who are looking to access health services, social activities, any day-to-day need to get around. In some instances, there are people who do not have a form of transport: they do not have a licence, they do not have a vehicle, they are somewhat socially disadvantaged, and the only way that they can get from point A to point B is by using a public amenity, and that could be a rideshare service.

Just on the front of that, the bill was introduced in the first sitting week of this year, and even though it is just a sitting week ago, it feels like they are rushing through this legislation without proper industry and stakeholder consultation on the bill itself. Given the very short time in which the bill was introduced and brought to debate, I am of the belief that there are a number of stakeholders who have expressed their disappointment, not only to the shadow minister but in general conversations that I have had in the last couple of weeks.

When rideshare was introduced into South Australia it came with a number of issues. The issues have been very well explained, the taxi industry has seen a significant level of adjustment and it is now going to cost the taxpayers of South Australia a significant amount of money for that compensation. I know back then the former transport minister, the Hon. Mr Mullighan, introduced rideshare and now the transport minister, the member for West Torrens, is going to compensate those taxi businesses, those plate holders, for the impact that Uber has had on them.

There has been concern regarding the bill's removal of independent oversight, as well as the increase in ministerial authority. The bill significantly expands ministerial discretion over accreditation and licensing and, effectively, that is centralising decision-making power into the hands of the minister without a clear industry oversight or an independent review mechanism. The bill removes independent processes and places nearly all accreditation decisions under direct ministerial control, affecting booking service providers, general passenger transport services, and individual drivers. I have been in this place long enough; you have to be wary of any bill that is put into place at pace and potentially places any minister as his own policeman. That is a concern I have.

The bill proposes to open up all of South Australia to rideshare operations. The current metropolitan boundary restricts where point-to-point services can operate, limiting passenger transport options for customers outside of the Adelaide metropolitan area. The bill will also allow for rideshare to operate across South Australia in both metro and regional areas. I want to talk a little bit about the regional setting. I understand there are some vagaries at the moment about the implementation of a rideshare service. I do not need to use names, but there are a number, I think three or four rideshare services, operating here in South Australia.

Will we be able to service a sparse electorate or a sparse part of South Australia? Will there be drivers? Will there be a level of interest that will service the sector without tarnishing a brand? I think that is fair to assume. I am regularly asked when rideshare will be coming to the Riverland. Just two years ago, I ran a survey and it had overwhelming support. People see this as not only an opportunity to access transport services but also an opportunity to test the viability of the market. I expect it will be welcomed by many. Regional communities and councils seem broadly supportive of the change, but in particular one brand, Uber, has flagged that it will take time to onboard drivers and ensure capacity before being rolled out in the regions.

When Uber, rideshare, was launched and announced in South Australia, I was of the view that I would support a taxi service over rideshare, but I soon became very tired of the same old, tired taxis that I hopped into. The most notable signature of an ailing taxi was that it had a whining diff, it had seats that were torn or it was dirty and smelly; it was an unreliable service at that point in time. However, competition has come into the marketplace and it has certainly smartened up the taxi industry. It has put some competition into the place.

When I am travelling overseas, particularly when I am visiting my son and his family in the US, I regularly catch Ubers from San Francisco airport out to Modesto. Modesto is about, let's say, two hours east of San Francisco. I hop into rideshares. The theme over there is that not every rideshare driver is a full-time driver. On their way to work, they potentially pick up a fare. If it is a short fare they might do a couple before work, and then go to work, and vice versa. A lot of people work out of regional California into the city, and that is exactly what I have found: a number of drivers that do. They pick up a driver on their way to work in the morning, and that might be from Modesto or close by—Stockton is an example, and Fresno. They will pick up someone from, for example, my son's place at Modesto and do a two-hour drive to work, which is something they do on a day-to-day basis.

They will also do the same thing coming back. They will pick up someone from the airport and take them out to a regional centre, and that is putting diversity into their income. Sitting in a vehicle for four hours a day is usually non-productive unless you are on the phone doing your work, conversing with a customer base. But if you are not doing that, why should you not be able to look at that type of model? As I said, it really does put a little bit of diversity into an income stream.

The current cost of a cab, particularly in the Riverland, is prohibitive. As I have said, it is $50 or $100 one way for a cab fare, which makes it prohibitive. With a limited bus service it is also very hard to get around an area or around the Riverland communities, which are quite spread out. If you live in a town like Renmark and you want to travel to Loxton, it is going to cost you $100 to get to the doctor, let alone paying $100 or over $100 for the doctor's fee. So I think we need to be able to demonstrate flexibility with this legislation and to understand how it will benefit a regional community or someone in a regional setting who is looking to get from point A to point B.

As I said, I think the point-to-point passenger service is progress. It is something that metropolitan Adelaide has enjoyed for a number of years now. It must be approaching 10 years that we have seen this service providing, I think, a really good service. It really did show the way for people getting out and about on public amenity or public transport, providing good service, clean vehicles and reliability. I think the pay-before-you-use concept is quite valuable. It saves cash transactions, and it saves some of those who are proponents of doing the wrong thing, who see cash money and the opportunity of committing crime, from interfering with people's public safety. I think that is something that Uber has really extinguished in many quarters.

I think this amendment bill will be an opportunity for many regional MPs to explore the opportunities that rideshare will present to their regional setting and to their communities to be able to access a transport service that they do not currently have. For many of us who do not have bus service, train service or tram service and only have a very limited taxi service, I think it really does go a very long way in evening up the ledger when it comes to getting about, visiting health professionals, making social outings and in terms of responsible driving. It really does open up great opportunities, and it opens up a better lifestyle when living in a regional setting.

It gives more opportunity for people to act responsibly. We do not like to hear of people drink driving, and we do not like to see road trauma, which we are seeing a lot of, particularly in a regional setting. That is where the majority of our road traumas are, in a regional setting. All regional roads, at some point, are at 110 km/h. We are not just a 40, 50 or 60 km/h zone, although in town sometimes it is.

We have to look at the bigger picture, and we have to, as I said, even up the ledger. Whether you live in the regions or whether you live in metro South Australia, I think point-to-point services, should they be implemented carefully and in a considered way, will be a coming of age for many of our regional settings.

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (16:43): Today I rise to discuss the Passenger Transport (Point to Point Transport Services) Amendment Bill 2025, which was introduced by the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport on 5 February 2025.

The government had an election commitment as part of their 2022 campaign, which was to initiate a review of the Passenger Transport Act. In August 2024, the government released 29 recommendations detailing proposed changes to the legislative framework that regulates taxis, rideshare and chauffeur vehicles.

The speech the minister made focused on safety, compliance and vehicle authorisation standards and these are certainly very important considerations. The bill also includes the removal of independent oversight and significantly expanded ministerial authority and discretion. The bill certainly does propose significant reforms to South Australia's point-to-point transport industry, impacting taxis, rideshare and chauffeur services. The government claims the bill is necessary to modernise the industry and implement elements of the taxi industry support package from the 2024-25 state budget.

There are significant concerns regarding the bill's removal of independent oversight and the significant increase in ministerial authority. This bill also proposes to open up all of South Australia to rideshare operators, which I truly welcome. The current metropolitan boundary, which has expanded over time, has now reached the southern edge of Mount Barker, but it has been very restrictive. It restricts where point-to-point services can operate, limiting passenger transport options for customers outside the Adelaide metropolitan area. The bill will allow for rideshare to operate across South Australia in both metropolitan and regional areas.

Just on that point, it is interesting to note we have been the only state in Australia to have a metropolitan boundary in place. All the rest of the states operate under one licence that can be operated across the whole state. For instance, you could have Sydney Uber drivers working in Sydney most of the time and they might go up the north coast of New South Wales during the summer and they do not need another licence; they just use the licence that they already have to operate during the summertime to capitalise on their licence. That only seems like common sense and it seems quite an oddity to say the least that there was this boundary disruption here in South Australia, because obviously operators did not want to have to go through the pain of having two licences, which just seemed ridiculous from day one, so hopefully this will iron all of that out.

Myself, the member for Schubert and other members on this side have advocated for this across our electorates. Regional communities and councils are very supportive of this change and Uber have flagged that setting up in the regions will take time to onboard drivers and ensure capacity before rolling out.

Regional taxi operators have flagged concern with this change, highlighting issues around busy summertimes being attractive to rideshare operators and vacating the regions during slower months. I have a different view. As it does in the city, I think across regional South Australia there are plenty of options where taxi services can work directly alongside Uber. With towns like Strathalbyn and Murray Bridge there is so much opportunity for these services to expand, because quite frankly there are next to no other services. There is a local dial-a-ride service in Murray Bridge, but there is no real public transport service in either town that is regular and connects to other towns. There is certainly no Metroticket, which would be most welcome in both areas to connect to the urban network.

For several years now I have been advocating on behalf of those local communities, especially with regard to the opportunities we have in the Murraylands and the Langhorne Creek wine district and areas surrounding these areas. As people have seen, we have that much opportunity with the wineries of Langhorne Creek. Some of these are hosting wedding events and other major events—we have Woodburn Homestead, outside of Langhorne Creek, which is a fantastic setting for weddings and other events—and there are so many other things that happen in the Langhorne Creek and Strathalbyn area. There are car runs and motorbike runs, but people just come out to enjoy the area, and the whole group want to enjoy the area, so something like Uber opening up will be more than welcome.

In the Murray Bridge/Murraylands region there are so many things happening. We see the Monarto Safari Park going from strength to strength with the new motel getting a new operator signed up—Journey Beyond, the train operators—who are going to take over the management of the safari park built by Gerry Ryan from Jayco. We really appreciate his investment into the safari park. There will be 78 rooms there and also 20 glamping tents where you can stay amongst the lions. I am sure there will be at least a little bit of fencing between you and the lions and all the other animals that are in the park. Elaine Bensted knows my passion for elephants, and we have finally got a couple of elephants at Monarto Safari Park, and we have three more coming. So I applaud all the activities at Monarto Safari Park. That is one place in my area that is really booming and where rideshare services could be utilised for access.

We have a lot of racing events in our local community. We have the speedway, we have go-karts and then further down the road, at Tailem Bend obviously, we have the Motorsport Park which is being well utilised every weekend for various events. Now, with the onset of the drags opening up there, after a long time—decades—without the opportunity for drag racing in Tailem Bend, it is so good to see that opportunity being taken up.

Right across the board, people could be visiting to utilise water sports, water activities on the river—which many do, obviously—so I think there is so much opportunity. Some people say, especially in the taxi industry, 'With Uber coming along it will cause too much disruption and put us out of work.' Well, I think there is lots of opportunity, especially on weekends, and this is where perhaps part-time drivers who have a full-time job or a nearly full-time job could operate on Friday and Saturday nights, because it is certainly needed, to pick up people from venues like the local hotels or wineries and get them home.

I know one of the cab services is looking at doubling their cabs into Murray Bridge and surrounding areas, so I think there will be a great uplift as Uber comes in and, yes, it will take time. I think there are thoughts that this could be activated for Gather Round, and hopefully it can be. Gather Round is not that far down the track; less than two months away. As Uber have stated, they need to onboard drivers, get people to go through all the compliance protocols that they need to do to get onboard to open up this opportunity throughout the regions. I think it will be exciting, and I think it is a real opportunity so long as it is managed appropriately, gets off the ground appropriately, and just works hopefully seamlessly.

That might be asking for too much because there are times when things do not happen seamlessly, depending on what the issue is. But there is a real opportunity to open up regions right across this state, especially for those who are not that far from Adelaide, and I think there is a real bonus that we could be looking at here in tourism across the regions and right across the state.

At the moment, there is the Passenger Transport Standards Committee, which is the body responsible for overseeing passenger transport standards, compliance and regulations. This committee ensures industry consultation, provides oversight on regulatory matters and acts as an independent advisory group to balance industry needs with government policy. This section of the current act will be repealed and the minister will not have a committee. Instead, all references to the committee will be transferred to ministerial authority. This means that all the regulatory oversight, industry consultation and standard-setting functions that were previously undertaken by the committee will now solely fall to the minister's discretion. In regard to internal review mechanisms, instead of going to the District Court these appeals will go to SACAT and that will come in with the new ministerial powers.

There have been some concerns raised about transparency and accountability with this change and some are suggesting that without the independent body to review and guide the regulations, industry participants, including people from right across the board, whether they are taxi operators, rideshare services or chauffeur companies, will have no formal mechanism to challenge or contribute to regulatory decisions. The Taxi Council are concerned that it will effectively make the minister, or his delegate, the judge, jury and executioner. As I have said, this does centralise the power in the minister's hands. We just need to make sure that, moving forward, this is used effectively to manage the industry in a positive way.

In regard to concerns about total ministerial control, there was broad agreement between both the Department for Infrastructure and Transport and the Taxi Council that the committee, which will become obsolete if this legislation is passed, has been relatively ineffective, dealing with rather trivial administrative issues and hands out insignificant fines for breaches. It is acknowledged that they believe the operations are opaque and that it is a time-consuming process for the department to prepare briefs for the committee to take action, even when CCTV footage of wrongdoing exists.

Certainly, in regard to the bill, the minister gets discretion over accreditation and licensing. Also, it places all the accreditation decisions under direct ministerial control, affecting booking service providers, general passenger transport services and individual drivers. That is taken over in various sections throughout the bill.

There is also part of the bill that has regard to the buyback scheme for taxi licences, which has obviously been an ongoing issue over many years, which offers $200,000 for the first metropolitan taxi licence and $10,000 for additional licences up to a total of six. This is obviously well below, in some places, what many operators originally paid for those licences. We are thinking that the proposed eight-year timeframe for buybacks is too long, leaving some licence holders still paying for loans when taxi licences were in excess of $300,000. Hopefully, there may be a restriction in that timeline to get these licences paid back.

In saying all that, the Taxi Council certainly do not want any delay. They have operators who, for a range of reasons, want to get out of the industry and they want the timeline reduced down to four years, if possible. There is a whole range of timelines around that, and then this bill takes out the requirement for perpetual taxi licences and replaces them with an uncapped annual licensing system. The legislation itself does not specify the exact cost of an annual taxi licence; this is something else that is under the discretion of the minister.

There has been consultation with Uber Australia and the Taxi Council of South Australia. Generally, apart from some in the taxi industry feeling they are over a barrel, they are keen for the legislation to get going and to just get on with it. Uber are keen to get on with the job. I have had different meetings with Uber; some have been on Teams. It will be a great thing to see extra options coming to communities from across the board, but it certainly will need a lot of time to onboard this new program. Obviously, you will need people to be involved and Uber drivers to be involved. They will need to be accredited and registered to offer those opportunities.

As I said, with the weekend opportunities in regional areas from Friday through to Sunday night and over long weekends as well, I think there is a huge opportunity with the number of entertainment options and functions that happen in the regions—such as across mine in the Murraylands and the beautiful wine region of Langhorne Creek—for point-to-point transport to prosper alongside the taxi industry so that people have a lot more options and a lot more flexibility when they are going out for entertainment and for work purposes as well. I know there will be some questions asked later on, but with those words I support the bill.

Mrs PEARCE (King) (17:01): My community has reflected a strong desire to see the playing field levelled when it comes to point-to-point transportation services. Whether it be from plate holders, commuters or residents who rely on access cabs, I have heard countless examples of how much the industry has changed over the years and the implications that have arisen as a result. We agree: change is much needed. There is no doubt that this sector is experiencing significant challenges ranging from safety concerns, fraudulent behaviour, price gouging and industry participants who are subject to differing requirements, particularly when it comes to safety measures.

We have given the concerns raised serious consideration, and it is why we made a commitment to review the act to be able to reform the point-to-point passenger transport industry—taxi, chauffeur and rideshare—and we have delivered on that. Released on 30 August 2024, the review made 29 recommendations to help bring about broad and enduring changes designed to make services safer and more reliable while also supporting a more sustainable industry. Feedback received was informed by industry, customers and key stakeholders, and I thank everyone who participated in this process, including those from my local community.

I have heard from taxi licence owners in my community who have tirelessly campaigned for additional support and stronger protections for their industry, especially in light of the introduction of ridesharing services in South Australia like Uber and DiDi. These dedicated workers invested significantly into the taxi industry, setting themselves and their families up for what they thought was years to come, yet these same taxi licence holders have seen their industry shrink under the impact of ridesharing services. Plate holders have continuously called for a level playing field and I am proud that the Malinauskas government is on its way to delivering just that.

I have also listened to countless stories in my community regarding difficulties accessing these vital services. Many from a local retirement village have told me of cancelled medical appointments, missed catch-ups and delayed shopping trips, all due to late taxi arrivals, some by more than an hour. This is an infringement on their independence and their ability to live healthily and well.

One Golden Grove resident told me of her heartbreak when she lost her licence due to vision loss. She is homebound but for two options: a family member who does not live nearby and works full-time hours, or cabs. On several occasions, she has been left frustrated with unreliable access cab services, especially when those services have failed to arrive on time. Arrival delays have meant that this resident has missed multiple medical appointments and has at times been stranded and forced to wait in extreme weather conditions at local shopping centres, where she had ventured to obtain her essential items and services.

These stories demonstrate why it is so important that adequate, safe and on-time services are available. Proper and reliable services are vital for seniors in particular and those requiring assistance so that they continue to live independent lives longer. My community will soon experience significant growth, and it is so important that we ensure that we have the right support services and accessible infrastructure, which does include reliable and on-time point-to-point services.

The bill before us today starts this process and aims to build a framework to overcome many of the concerns that have been raised. It has taken on board much of the feedback received through the review and those reflected from local communities like mine, and it sets out to level the playing field across a plethora of measures.

Firstly, it will remove the limit on the number of taxis that can operate, as well as deliver taxi industry support. As a I touched on earlier, we have heard from taxi stakeholders about the devastating impact changes to the industry have had since the introduction of rideshare. This bill removes the requirement for a perpetual licence to operate a taxi, removing the barrier to entry, and introduces an uncapped annual licence regime.

The bill will also allow the state government to deliver compensation to the taxi industry, with eligible licence holders to receive $200,000 for the first metropolitan taxi licence held and $10,000 for each subsequent licence, up to a total of six licences. In addition, anyone who is not eligible and has had the perpetual licence cancelled will receive $10,000 compensation. Access taxi licence holders will receive $100,000 for their first licence and $10,000 for each subsequent licence.

For those not invested in this field and wondering how the cost will be covered, it will be in part funded by an increase in the point-to-point transport service transaction levy. The levy helps fund assistance packages to metropolitan taxi licence holders and lessees to help them transition to a new regulatory model following the introduction of rideshare. It will now be increased to $2.

Under the new framework, vehicles will need to be authorised to provide a passenger transport service. Through doing this, the bill will help ensure vehicles meet prescribed standards, including vehicle identification and safety requirements. The bill will also strengthen compliance and enforcement regimes by introducing new offences and automatic suspension and cancellation of accreditation in prescribed circumstances. Those include circumstances where a driver will automatically have their passenger transport driver accreditation suspended if they do not have a current driver's licence. Additionally, a person's accreditation will be cancelled if they have committed a prescribed offence, have breached the general safety duty or no longer meet the requirements to hold that type of accreditation.

Safety was an absolute paramount concern raised by both passengers and drivers alike. I am pleased that this bill enhances safety for drivers and passengers by introducing a general safety duty with similar principles to the Work Health and Safety Act 2012 and the Heavy Vehicle National Law (South Australia) Act. This introduces a legal requirement to eliminate or minimise the risk of incidents involving death, injury or damage and to encourage the development, maintenance and continuous improvement of work safety practices. This duty will apply to those within the chain of responsibility for providing a passenger transport service other than public transport, including the service provider, the driver and holder of vehicle authorisation.

Finally, the bill implements a number of additional review recommendations, with others that will able to be implemented via future regulation changes to help bring about further improvements to the industry. We want to make sure that we get this right and that we are tackling all concerns that have been raised with us. I thank the community, which has worked with us to achieve these changes to date, and those who will continue working with us to help improve point-to-point services in communities all across our state. With that, I commend this bill to the house.

Ms PRATT (Frome) (17:09): What better audience could I ask for to talk to on the topic of regional tourism than the current minister and former Minister for Tourism? It is clear from the contributions that we have seen in the house this afternoon that tourism is front and centre as the winner of reform coming to the rideshare industry. Rising to speak in support of the Passenger Transport (Point to Point Transport Services) Amendment Bill 2025, it is clear, certainly from this side of the house, that country members of parliament see an opportunity—a rare opportunity—for our country constituents to share in something that our city cousins have been enjoying for quite a while.

I want to thank my colleagues for the speeches that I have heard. The member for Hammond reflected on the significant tourism experience of Monarto, with the Monarto Safari Park, and the investment that we have seen in that area, not just around experiences at Monarto but in accommodation and what opportunities there are for local residents to access this form of transport, not just those who are perhaps coming from the city on a tour bus. The member for Chaffey reflected on opportunities in the Riverland and how point-to-point rideshare services would enhance those experiences.

Many of us represent communities that are connected one to the other. If you do not have a vehicle and you do not have the means to leave your town, which may be on a smaller scale, to get to that event that is 10 minutes down the road if only you had a vehicle, we see great opportunities that would open up—not just the visitor economy coming to our regions but for those people who live locally and would like to access those events more often, whether it is the Food and Wine Festival in the Riverland or whether it is the Port Lincoln Cup Carnival that takes place over on the West Coast. I perhaps pre-empt what my colleague, the member for Flinders, might talk about.

In particular, I want to recognise the great effort that has been undertaken by my colleague, the member for Schubert, who has led a very strong community campaign calling for these services to finally arrive in the regions. Do not tell her I said this, but of course the Barossa really is one of our pre-eminent destinations in South Australia as far as a regional tourism experience goes, and the government knows this.

We are seeing significant investment being made in infrastructure in Lyndoch to support the Gather Round. We want our guests who are coming in to South Australia to have the best possible experience, which is not just getting to the football but enjoying everything that that region has to offer. This bill gives us all an opportunity to reflect on exactly what we want our communities and our guests to experience when they come to visit.

It is no small feat for 3,000 constituents of Schubert to participate in a survey, an engagement activity, demonstrating I think up to 95 per cent support. In my own electorate of Frome, in the heart of this electorate and the centre of this electorate is the Clare Valley. While the opportunities for tourism throughout Frome—from the Light region up to Goyder and Burra—are limitless, really, particularly in national parks and ecotourism, the Clare Valley offers something that on a smaller scale echoes our wine grapegrowing communities around the state. I see people who live locally denied the opportunity to perhaps fully enjoy events like the Gourmet Weekend, which is now the Gourmet Week, again for the want of a vehicle or the means to perhaps move freely.

If I can paint you a picture, Mr Speaker, I know that you are very familiar with this region, but in those beautiful valley towns from Clare through Penwortham to Watervale, Leasingham, Auburn and all of the districts that are part of that catchment, imagine a day out where you can leave your accommodation—it might be the Mill Street apartments, it might be the new and stylish Clare Hillside Apartments—and you are in a rideshare travelling down the valley to Taylors' fantastic newly opened cellar door in Auburn.

It enables you to meander back through some of our gin distilleries, like Sawmill Gin or the soon to be formally opened Clare Valley Distillery. That is a stunning location, Mr Speaker; you will have to come and visit. We have fantastic dining opportunities. To be able to safely travel to the Watervale Hotel, the Sevenhill pub, Slate Restaurant at Pikes winery and all the pubs in the district, from the Rising Sun to the Magpie and Stump—perhaps not all in one day, but there is that freedom and autonomy to move around and enjoy everything that our region has to offer in that wining, dining, accommodation, hospitality experience.

At the southern end of the electorate, of course, is Two Wells. While I focused on tourism, there is an opportunity, for the first time, to deliver what would be publicly accessible transport options for a community that is on the cusp, on the edge, of the city. It still defines itself as country, and it really has no public transport to speak of. This amendment bill has come about in part as a result of the state government initiating a review of the Passenger Transport Act, and what that delivered to this house were 29 recommendations that really started to look at the legislative framework that governs taxis, rideshare and chauffeur vehicles.

In conversation as the opposition, we were concerned that briefings were not readily forthcoming or in some part rushed. There is certainly a sense of pace about the government's approach to this legislation, but neither is the legislation unwelcome. I think we all have appreciated a chance to reflect on what it means for our communities today. As one example of a rideshare service that is operating in the city, Uber has flagged that setting up in the regions will take time to onboard drivers, and that is quite an understatement. We have workforce shortages across all industries, and rideshare would be no different.

So there are some questions, concerns or hesitations, perhaps, about a speedy rollout if the infrastructure and the personnel are not there. I know in the Clare Valley I have attended a number of sessions run by community groups and employment organisations where we are trying to invest in our younger generation just getting their licence. Just getting their licence is a challenge in country SA, yet a young person getting their licence and getting access to a vehicle is the mechanism by which they can find work for themselves that might take them out of the town they are living in.

That has been dependent on volunteers who would be prepared to donate their time to train a young person or to support them collecting their hours in the logbook. I know that young people would be looking at this as an opportunity for work, casual, part time or perhaps something that they turn into more full-time work because they really enjoy moving people around. We need to better understand what is the capacity of regions or the state to provide that driving workforce that would deliver a reliable and consistent rideshare service.

That brings me to reflect very seriously on the taxi industry. I want to give a big shout-out to a friend of mine, Veer Atwal, who is a critical business operator in the Clare Valley because if not for him we would not have a taxi service at all. It is valued and it is highly patronised. I see taxis on the road all the time, and I am sure that there is probably feedback from the community that they would like even more access, but here we are relying on private operators, private investors, owner-operators to do this work.

It is very important that we pay close attention to what the taxi industry's feedback or response to this legislation has been. That is where we need to find a balance within the market of catering for consumers, catering for passengers and providing choice. That is certainly possible in the city but less so in the country. We are lucky in those towns where there is a taxi service that it is highly regarded, and I would be loath to do anything to see that industry disrupted.

The feedback we have had is that regional taxi operators are flagging concerns about any change to the legislation that governs their industry, highlighting issues that around busy summertimes, where there might be a peak, it might be attractive to rideshare operators, but it might result in vacating those regions during slower months. That either puts pressure back onto the taxis or in fact what would be devastating to the Clare community is that the taxi business packs up and goes home.

My final reflections are on the buyback scheme. The scheme seems to be offering $200,000 for that first plate, although that is probably for metropolitan taxi licences. In my own family living interstate, who have relied on taxi licences as the family business, the arrival of Uber on our Australian shores has certainly been a big disrupter to the market. In some ways that is old news but it has certainly been cause for consternation in a community that has only ever had access to taxis, and of course the market has encouraged us to find that autonomy, to download the apps, to enjoy Uber Eats and to negotiate our fares.

For women and perhaps men—I cannot speak for them—certainly for those later night journeys where someone is looking for a safe ride home, the app and rideshare services give you a lot more information than we have ever had before around the registration you are looking for, the driver's name, photo image, and crosschecking them to make sure they are picking up the right passenger.

With the buyback scheme of $200,000 per plate, I respect the feedback from the industry that the proposal of an eight-year timeframe for those buybacks is really too long, yet it seems that we are at an impasse where there are mum-and-dad taxi owner-operators who are probably just needing to get out of the market, and in that way they need to get some assurance from the government that there will be a resolution to the buyback scheme.

The other concern that has been raised by the opposition in seeking briefings is to better understand the levy, where the bill doubles the existing point-to-point transport levy from $1 to $2 per trip. That not just increases costs for passengers but these funds raised will finance the taxi licence buyback scheme. But there is a risk of that burden ultimately falling back onto passengers. The opposition has asked questions and will continue to ask questions about how the levy is collected, what revenue is coming back to government and how that is being spent.

Is it returning in some way to the Department for Infrastructure and Transport or the public passenger services, or is it going into general revenue in a way that it really just gets absorbed? There does not seem to be a clear track of how this revenue is collected, how it is invested. For the government to expect or demand that that levy will be doubled, we do not have any transparency on how that return back to the government will assist South Australians. It is a question that needs to be answered.

We support the bill in principle. I am pleased to note that in feedback to the opposition we know several regional councils have also demonstrated their support. They have been consulted about opening up rideshare in regional South Australia, and that support is broadly there. The support comes from me as well. Within my own electorate of Frome there are six councils that I think would all agree that reform and the delivery of this legislation would be welcome. With those remarks, I conclude my contribution and support the bill.

The Hon. A. PICCOLO (Light) (17:26): I rise to speak in support of the bill. I note that the Passenger Transport (Point to Point Transport Services) Amendment Bill amends the Passenger Transport Act 1994 to implement recommendations arising out of the government's commitments to review the act and reform the point-to-point passenger transport industry, which includes taxi, chauffeur and rideshare. The bill also seeks to implement elements of the taxi industry support package, approved as part of the state budget during the 2024-25 financial year.

On 30 August 2024, the government released the review, which made 29 recommendations informed by feedback from industry, customers and other key stakeholders. The review has provided a framework for broad and enduring change designed to make services safer and more reliable while supporting a more sustainable industry. It is certainly a truism that change in this industry is required. There is no doubt this sector has experienced significant challenges, and those challenges are from the various disrupter-type industries and services provided. From safety concerns, fraudulent behaviour and industry participants subject to different requirements, this review and the bill before us aim to build a framework to overcome some of these concerns.

As I said, I do support the bill. While I believe the bill is well intentioned and has some sound objectives, I am not yet 100 per cent convinced that this bill will address some of the issues raised in my electorate. I think it is important to raise those concerns. Having said that, I am not sure what can be done, but this bill will certainly provide a foundation for those concerns to be looked at in the future. The greatest concern I have is that the Gawler area was, for better or worse, put into the metropolitan point-to-point area some time ago by the previous government. The previous government also allowed one operator a licence for that area.

That certainly theoretically increased the number of taxis available to the town of Gawler. The problem was that because Gawler was previously under a country model and had local services, they now have to compete with the Adelaide-based taxi services. That competition in itself is not a bad thing. However, what has resulted is that all the profitable part of the business was taken up by the Adelaide-based company and, if you like, the less profitable trips were left to local services, which in the end meant they could not make enough money to keep it sustainable.

One of my concerns is that while we can open all this up to rideshare and other things, they are the ones who actually like to pick and choose the trips they take. In the end, you will have a certain number of trips in a place like Gawler and other nearby towns where people actually want to take a short trip. It might be from their home to the main street, which may only be a kilometre or two, which is not a big trip for any taxidriver. However, for that person it means whether they can actually leave their home and do what they need to do—go to the doctor, go shopping or whatever the case may be.

The Adelaide-based services will not come out there to pick people up. They will be there, though, on Friday and Saturday nights, all over the place, when the demand is high. Unless in this industry you allow some people to have a bit of both, some of those players will just fall out of the market and some people will be worse off. That is one of the concerns.

The other concern is a very vexed question, because on the one hand I hear numerous complaints from my electorate regarding access to access cabs, and on the other hand I understand the government hears from the providers that they do not have enough business, etc. Certainly in my area there is a huge demand for access cabs, and I have heard a number of people complain about the access cabs being either late, by hours and hours, or not turning up. Again, that sort of fits into the model where we can open this industry up but it does not mean, in some markets, that they will turn up. There is a real risk of market failure, and there will be pockets of people who actually might be worse off under this new model than they are at the moment.

I hope I am wrong. I hope that by introducing this latest proposal it will actually provide for greater opportunities for people to be in the marketplace. I hope that some of the provisions in this bill will make entry into the marketplace equal for all players. I seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

At 17:32 the house adjourned until Wednesday 19 February 2025 at 10:30.