Passenger Transport (Point to Point Transport Services) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 18 February 2025.)

The Hon. A. PICCOLO (Light) (15:59): I just want to spend a moment or two just to close off the comments I started yesterday. As I said yesterday, I think this bill has a lot of good things in it and I think it is one which we should support. It will certainly improve things, but we will just keep some things under review because I am still concerned, particularly for those peri-urban areas like my own seat, the seat of Light, and similar areas, where some of these reforms may or may not work given the unique circumstances and nature of those communities.

In particular, I would want to make sure that responses by point-to-point services for short trips are good because at the moment it is quite dreadful in Gawler. Even though we have a statewide service now which was licensed to service that area, it is not supporting those short trips which are required in communities like Gawler and even in smaller towns.

Another thing is that I would want to make sure about access services. I have had a number of complaints regarding access cabs and I want to make sure that they are actually available. I hear a lot of stories about them turning up late or not turning up at all, and people living with disability or caring for someone with disability actually deserve better. With those comments, I support the bill and commend it to the house.

Mr TELFER (Flinders) (16:00): I rise to make a brief contribution to the Passenger Transport (Point to Point Transport Services) Amendment Bill 2025. There are obviously many different aspects and components to this bill that are being considered. As has already been mooted by the opposition, there will be a series of questions through the committee stage so there will be more clarity for our communities and also the industries that are impacted by this piece of legislation. Obviously the bill in its entirety proposes some significant reforms to South Australia's point-to-point transport industry which impacts taxis, rideshare, and chauffeur services.

Obviously the move from the government they say is necessary to modernise the industry and implement the elements of the taxi industry support package from the 2024-25 state budget. There are many different aspects that have already been discussed at length in a number of the second reading contributions. As a regional MP, obviously the bit that I am interested in is the aspect of the bill which removes the existing metropolitan boundaries for rideshare services. This is a move that will allow rideshare companies such as Uber and DiDi to be able to operate statewide, including in regional areas where they have not previously been able to.

There has been much call within regional communities for this to be implemented to allow some flexibility and freedom in trying to properly reflect what the needs of regional communities are. Indeed, we have heard from regional communities right across South Australia—even in Flinders, which is a fair distance away from the metropolitan area—that there need to be greater transport options for communities that struggle with taxi availability.

We do have to be cautious in this, and we have heard concerns and perhaps you would say warnings from taxi operators that potentially an influx of new competitors into already lower-demand areas such as regional South Australia could destabilise services and potentially lead to inconsistent availability and driver shortages in off-peak periods. This is something which needs to be enacted in a wise way and in a strategic way when it comes to regional South Australia in particular.

The opposition have been active in making sure we are engaging with some of the potential rideshare companies, and my colleague the member for Schubert has already spoken about conversations with Uber regarding the potential for regional South Australia. Obviously, while Uber Australia supports such a change, there will need to be time to put structures in place to be able to onboard enough drivers in regional areas. In an area such as the southern Eyre Peninsula, for instance, in my electorate of Flinders, there are a number of movements of people into that community through what is the second busiest passenger airport in the state.

There are a lot of movements of tourists and locals going back and forth. There is an existing taxi service in place in Port Lincoln. I have heard from my community that there have been uncertainties and concerns about getting that existing taxi service to appropriately suit the needs of the existing community demand and also what potential there could be for rideshare services to be in place in Port Lincoln and for a more sporadic service during some of the busier times in regional South Australia such as major events and concerts. For instance, during the much-loved Adelaide to Port Lincoln regatta there is a significant influx of people coming in without vehicles to drive around.

There is great potential in regional South Australia for rideshare opportunities to be put in place. That could potentially open up the opportunity for areas a bit further away from Port Lincoln—Coffin Bay, Tumby Bay and the like—where there are some ingenious ways that people manage to transport themselves. Obviously, in regional areas there is also a lesser supply of hire cars. I have heard a variety of different stories of people who just make a friend down the street and pay them a certain amount of money to drive them out to Coffin Bay to enjoy the sites and tastes of Coffin Bay before trying to find their way back.

Something like this in place in regional South Australia could potentially hit an aspect of the demand market which is not currently being appropriately serviced, but we do have to be careful in regional South Australia that we are not undermining those existing taxi services. The opposition have already pointed out their support for the bill. We will be asking questions to get a word of surety, I guess, for regional communities that the balance is right when it comes to putting some of these rideshare expansion opportunities into regional South Australia, especially into my electorate of Flinders. With those comments, I indicate my support for the bill.

Ms STINSON (Badcoe) (16:07): I rise to support the Passenger Transport (Point to Point Transport Services) Amendment Bill 2025. Obviously, I am the member for Badcoe, which is an inner south-western suburban seat, and we are of course quite blessed with travel options in my area. Not only do we have, I think, quite fantastic public transport with tram, train and bus services but also taxi services are quite willing to service our area and also Uber and other rideshare services as well.

However, as a person who grew up in regional Australia—the house may not know that I spent all of my childhood in regional Australia, whether that was in Western Australia, country New South Wales or the Northern Territory—I am certainly very familiar with some of the things that especially those opposite have raised in relation to this bill.

One of the things I found as a child and then especially as a young person, as a teenager who wanted to go out and do things and see the world, was the challenge of transport from regional areas. I think I started taking the XPT, the CountryLink train, down the coast of New South Wales when I was about 14 or 15 to be able to go and see relatives in Sydney, all the way from what was then my hometown in Port Macquarie, New South Wales. That was quite a big and long journey. I think it took about eight hours to get there, but I remember the sense of great responsibility and trust that was placed in me when I got to go by myself.

That is one reflection of the time taken and even the inconvenience and lack of services that I remember from my childhood and the challenge of living in regional areas and being able to access transport services that were going where you wanted, when you wanted to be there.

So often job opportunities, social opportunities or family opportunities were dictated by what the CountryLink train schedule said rather than when you might actually want to travel. Going to see a family member who lived in the city was not a matter of just popping along to see them, it was a matter of great planning and some expense as well, to be able to book the ticket and get down there and then get back again.

It is not the kind of thing I experience now in Badcoe where I only need to drive about five minutes or maybe walk half an hour to see everyone in my electorate, but that experience as a child was one of days and weeks of planning to be able to go to the city or to go to another capital city or to another regional centre to be able to apply for jobs, to be able to see my relatives and to be able to have a bit of fun as well.

Those have been my reflections as I have been listening mainly to those opposite who have been expressing their experiences of travel and transport when reflecting on this bill. I also think that it is incredibly important that this house does in fact pretty much go out of its way to service our regional communities. As a person who did grow up in a country community, there are many challenges, not just transport, but access to a range of services, government or otherwise, that people living, working and building a family in regional areas experience.

Reflecting on this bill, I think that it is a good sign of the commitment that we do have to those regional areas, to people in our country communities who, as I heard someone only the other day refer to as the productive part of our population—not that the other part is not productive but that they are doing a lot of the producing and primary industries and we should be grateful for that and we should be reflecting on that in where we put our attention as policymakers.

The other matter I wanted to reflect on in this bill is that obviously the taxi industry will be affected. I note that the taxi industry continues to call for state government support to address the decrease in metropolitan taxi licences and leasing values, and for the impact of the introduction of rideshare upon their business viability to be catered for. Based on information from the industry, the taxi industry has seen a reduction of over 50 per cent of taxi work since the introduction of rideshare.

I turn to this point and make these points because I do have quite a high number of taxi drivers in the electorate of Badcoe, particularly in the western part of the seat. I thank those people for coming and raising issues with me over a period of time in relation to taxis and the position that they find themselves in, in relation to rideshare, but also other matters well. I am well aware that in my community there is a large number of people with a direct interest in this bill and, in fact, their livelihoods depend on being able to provide those services.

The review that stimulated this amendment bill recommended an annual licensing regime where licences would be issued by the state government on an uncapped basis, that is that they would be unlimited. The licences would be valid for 12 months and could be renewed but would still be subject to an annual fee. This also means the cancellation of current perpetual metropolitan and access taxi licences. The review recommended that annual licences would not be able to be privately leased, sold or shared.

Of course, the bill does implement those recommendations for review of the taxi licences. The bill implements the recommendation of the 12-month annual taxi licence and that that licence would not be leased or transferable, and would be issued on application by the department for an annual fee. The annual fee amount is not actually prescribed in this bill. Those who I am sure are tuning in to hear this from my electorate may go looking for it but you will not find it in this bill. It is yet to be determined, and I understand it will be in the regulations.

The question is: how will the taxi industry be compensated? The taxi industry reform package is being implemented to enable a transition to new models for metro and access taxi licences. Eligibility for payment under the package will be through a buyback scheme, as determined by the minister, who will prescribe eligibility by notice in the Gazette. Once again, you will not find that in this bill, but you will find it in the Gazette at a later stage.

The review recommended that eligible metropolitan taxi licence holders receive a payment of $200,000 for their first licence and a payment of $10,000 for each subsequent licence, up to a total of six licences. The review also recommended that all access taxi licence holders receive a payment of $100,000 for their first licence and $10,000 for each subsequent licence. In consulting on the review with industry, in addition every metro taxi licence holder will receive $10,000, not only those who are eligible for the buyback.

I am aware that there are different models in different states, and different amounts paid at different stages or different numbers of taxi licences, but having spoken with the minister about this I believe that we have struck the right balance in the figures that we have arrived at, that the government has arrived at, and how they are to be applied.

I do not think it is the case that necessarily everyone will be happy with particular amounts, given their particular circumstances, but obviously a line has to be drawn somewhere, and I think that the government has gone to great lengths, with a very detailed report and very detailed consultation, to try to arrive at something that it is as fair as it can possibly be. The buyback will be funded by increasing the point-to-point transport service transaction levy by $1 and a portion of the Adelaide Airport service fee.

Access taxis are something I get a lot of questions about in my electorate, and obviously access taxis are incredibly important. They are very important to people in my electorate, but indeed across the metropolitan area and across the state, so it is important that they are duly considered in this bill, and I believe they are.

Access taxis are operated under a special vehicle taxi licence and are specifically designed or adapted to carry passengers who use wheelchairs, scooters or other large or ride-on mobility aids. Drivers undergo special training to increase their understanding, knowledge and skills in order to cater effectively for passengers with disabilities.

I was reminded of just how important that additional training is—and really that our taxi drivers here in South Australia are very conscious of their obligations, having undergone that training—when I listened to a story on AM this morning on the ABC, which was actually about a case interstate where a woman had had her bookings cancelled 32 times with a rideshare service. She was taking a case, I think, to the equal opportunity tribunal, to raise the point that once the provider became aware that she had an assistance dog those drivers had cancelled her booking.

Obviously, it will be fought out in front of the tribunal, but on face value—and certainly the story reflected this—that is not consistent with our laws. There are obligations on taxi drivers and on rideshare operators to make sure that people who have a mobility aid, or an assistance dog for that matter, are enabled to use point-to-point transport. That case this morning that I was listening to really piqued my interest, and of course it is timely that that has come up when we are today debating this amendment bill.

Certainly, I will be watching that case with an eye to whether additional training such as our taxi operators undergo is needed for rideshare services, to make sure that people in our community do have fair and equitable access to transport options.

Access taxi services are currently delivered via the centralised booking service (CBS). Currently, Suburban has a contract with the state to deliver access taxi booking services, and then they deliver access taxi services with the operators and the drivers. Access taxis are privately owned, they do general taxi work and disability work and they often have a second radio. Taxi companies also take multiseat vehicle bookings and use access taxis. Operators are independent traders and permitted to do general taxi work, and prohibiting them raises issues around restricting trade. There are, however, conditions that apply to drivers and operators that restrict the ability to do general taxi work during peak times and that aim to ensure bookings made for access taxi work are prioritised, as they should be.

There were some issues identified in the review—that very thorough review I referred to earlier—in relation to access taxi services, particularly around availability and reliability, which have been identified over an extended period of time. The review also found that customers who rely on access taxi services continue to receive what they view as poorer service, including taxis running late or not arriving. That is incredibly disappointing.

This restricts the ability for people with a disability to engage in everyday activities that many of us of course take for granted. Each month, on average over 500 people with a booking are forced to wait more than 30 minutes for an access taxi. There is obviously some work to be done there to try to improve those figures and make sure that people are getting the access that they need.

I might finally reflect again on, as I said earlier, the importance of ensuring that we are providing point-to-point services to regional communities. I do note that from time to time we have very exciting events in our regional communities. Of course, we have Gather Round coming up, and we would love to see people participating in that as fully as possible.

I hope that, with the passage of this bill, we do see these services provided to regional communities across the state, not only so that people can enjoy their social lives, which we hope they will, but so that they can participate fully in the economy and obtain and do the jobs that they wish to do, and so they can see family and keep their community connections. These are things that so many of us in inner suburban seats like my own have actually taken for granted for quite some time.

I would like to thank those who have been involved in developing this bill, particularly the Minister for Transport, who has kept in touch with me about the development of this bill, particularly in relation to the compensation for taxi drivers. He and I share a boundary, so he, like me, has a number of taxi drivers in his electorate. They are a force to be reckoned with.

Former Mayor John Trainer, who is in fact a former member and also former Speaker of this place, is a very strong advocate for the taxi community. I commend him deeply for his work. Not only do I hear him on the radio but of course I catch up with him from time to time. He is constantly about advancing the needs of his industry, the industry that he represents with taxi drivers. I know that the Minister for Transport also keeps in close contact with him and has listened to the points that he has raised, as well as those from individuals in our communities who are affected by this bill.

With that, I recommend the bill to the house. I thank the minister and his staff and all those who have worked so hard to develop this.

Debate adjourned on motion of Mr Odenwalder.