Bills

Rail Safety National Law (South Australia) (Miscellaneous No 3) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 28 March 2017.)

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK (15:24): I rise to make some remarks in support of this piece of legislation, which I think it is fair to say is the result of some growing pains in the regime of the Rail Safety National Law. The Rail Safety National Law system has created a single rail safety regulator and promulgated laws to enhance that objective, which commenced in 2013 and operates across all jurisdictions.

It was originally agreed to in December 2009 by the Council of Australian Governments. The National Transport Commission identified amendments required, in cooperation with the regulator and all jurisdictions, and the ministers of the Transport and Infrastructure Council approved this particular bill in November last year, with South Australia being the host jurisdiction which is responsible for the passage of amendment bills through the South Australian parliament. This is the third bill to be brought to the South Australian parliament under this regime.

This particular bill will amend some of the powers to charge specific fees. When I referred, in my introductory remarks, to growing pains, I understood that the funds being invested in rail have expanded by some four times and the regulator is not resourced to provide that level of oversight of some $60 billion so therefore is seeking the means for significant rail projects to be able to charge additional fees. This will enact that objective and provide a range of supporting regulations in order to do so. With those remarks, I commend the bill to the house.

The Hon. T.T. NGO (15:26): I rise today to speak on the Rail Safety National Law (South Australia) (Miscellaneous No. 3) Amendment Bill 2017. As far as I am aware, the Council of Australian Governments agreed to implement national rail safety reform in 2009. This reform was carried out by the creation of a single rail safety regulator, in conjunction with the development of a national rail safety law which would be administered by the rail regulator.

The national law was developed by the National Transport Commission and the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator, together with various jurisdictions. South Australia, as a host jurisdiction, is responsible for the passage of the law and any amendment bills through the South Australian parliament. This particular bill constitutes the third amendment package to be considered by parliament, with the first amendment package having commenced on 1 July 2015 and the second on 1 September 2016.

This bill seeks to introduce powers for the regulator to charge additional fees for major rail projects due to increased investments. When the regulator was established in 2012, investment in major rail projects was estimated to be $15.4 billion; however, in 2016 major rail projects announced or already commenced are in excess of $60 billion. The regulator is not resourced to provide the level of oversight necessary to the level of investment currently occurring in major rail projects.

On the subject of major rail projects, this Labor government has well and truly been getting on with the job of investing in rail projects. Included amongst these is the completed Goodwood Rail Junction Project. The Goodwood junction upgrade separated the existing freight and Belair passenger lines from the Seaford line, removing the need for trains on either track to stop and give way. Construction of the rail underpass near Victoria Street lowers the Seaford line below ground level with the freight and Belair lines above.

The other project is the Torrens Rail Junction project. The Torrens rail junction is where the interstate freight railway crosses the Outer Harbor passenger railway, located in the Parklands between Port Road, Thebarton and War Memorial Drive in North Adelaide. The existing rail junction poses a productivity constraint to the strategically important Adelaide to Melbourne rail freight line, with freight trains forced to give way to Outer Harbor passenger trains at the junction.

This project will upgrade separate rail lines by lowering the Outer Harbor rail line below both the interstate rail line and the adjacent inner ring routes, which is the Park Terrace one. The lowered rail line will extend for a length of approximately 1.4 kilometres. The Torrens Rail Junction Project is currently underway with over 200 jobs expected to be created during construction with completion by early 2018.

Another project is extending the city tram network. Whilst those opposite continually oppose investment in light rail—it is like they hate public transport—the Labor government is getting on with the job of ensuring the City of Adelaide has a tram network that they can be proud of. The most recent announcement in relation to trams was the announcement to extend the tram network along North Terrace to the East End as part of the first stage of the AdeLINK tram network.

Electrification of the Gawler line is another project. In 2014, the state Labor government announced the $152.4 million electrification of the Gawler line from Adelaide to Salisbury. Early work so far undertaken on the Gawler line includes the commencement of utility service relocation works, the manufacture of nearly 500 masts, the installation of nearly 300 masts, and footings and rail track modification works as necessary for electrification. This shows that the Labor government is committed to investment in rail, especially in the northern suburbs, but where are the federal and state Liberals? Absolutely nowhere.

At the last federal election, the Labor opposition announced they would reverse the shock $76 million cut to the project by the Coalition in order for the project to start a year earlier. This would not only create local jobs but would ensure diesel trains were replaced with electric cars, with more capacity for more than 10,000 daily users. The federal Liberals are yet to come to the party in order to enable the electrification from Salisbury to Gawler to occur, and in typical fashion those opposite sit silent in order to obey the commands of their federal masters.

Instead, those opposite continue to spread their unviable, uneconomical, desperate attempt to sandbag the Adelaide Hills from the NXT team—Globe Link. I shall enjoy those opposite trying to convince the South Australian public to spend $3.6 billion on a freight bypass that only a minuscule portion of South Australians want. With that, I commend this bill.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS (Minister for Police, Minister for Correctional Services, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Road Safety) (15:34): Let me thank those members who have taken the time, unlike others, to make a contribution on this bill and particularly the Hon. Tung Ngo for making an outstanding contribution. As many members are aware, this bill is important, going forward, to ensure that the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator is properly resourced in order to maintain appropriate regulatory oversight as the number of rail projects increase across the country.

In 2012 when the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator was established, investment in major rail projects had an estimated value of $15.4 billion. However, in 2016 major rail projects, announced or having already commenced, totalled over $60 billion. It is thus evident why this bill introduces powers for the regulator to charge additional fees for major rail projects in order to keep pace with such a dramatic rise in projects.

While it is always pleasing to see investment in major rail projects across the nation, it is somewhat disappointing that South Australia does not seem to be a priority of the federal Coalition government when it comes to investment in major rail projects, as has been demonstrated by the $76 million funding cut to the electrification of the Gawler line. I am sure those opposite will, as usual, try to stick up for their federal masters and their master, the member for Sturt; however, on this side we stand up for the interests of South Australia.

The Hon. T.J. Stephens: Say it slowly.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: On this side we stand up for the interests of South Australia. If only those opposite—

The Hon. T.J. Stephens: What a load of crap.

The PRESIDENT: Minister, just sit down for a second. Hon. Mr Stephens, it is totally inappropriate to refer to something the minister is saying as 'a load of crap'. I think you should withdraw that, now.

The Hon. T.J. Stephens: I withdraw it. I think it's a load of rubbish.

The PRESIDENT: Minister.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: He's a clever one over there. If only those opposite stood up to their federal counterparts and demanded that South Australia receive funding to complete the electrification of the Gawler line or to fix the Oaklands crossing or to continue to expand the AdeLINK tram network, they would not then have to deliberately distribute those thousands of deceptive flyers to voters about Labor not committing funds to the upgrade and face the humiliation of being forced by the Electoral Commission to send out a retraction.

However, unfortunately for South Australians, there is only one thing that is important to those opposite—themselves. They could not think of anything worse than standing up to Master Pyne in fear of rebuke from the member for Sturt. I urge those opposite to find the courage to stick up for South Australia when it comes to infrastructure funding and to urge their mates in Canberra to ensure South Australia gets their fair share.

Returning to the bill, I would also like to thank the Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator for its continued efforts to improve rail safety and its efforts in the preparation of the bill for which we have been the lead legislator. I thank all members for their contributions and I hope the success of the reforms to national rail safety continues.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

In committee.

Clauses 1 to 4 passed.

Clause 5.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Members have spoken generally about the need for the regulator to be able to charge additional fees, notwithstanding the unusual politicisation by the government of elements of their failed rail transport policies. Could the minister provide some indication of what the existing fees are and the order of change of this new regime of fees being proposed through this legislation?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: I have been advised, for the honourable member's benefit, on what the applicable fees will be in a few different contexts. Maybe that will help. The highest fee would be $198,000 per annum. Examples of where that may apply would be where the proposed technology is not used or there is limited use in the Australian rail industry, or the project is highly complex and may involve significant technological operational change which presents a higher safety risk to the public, such as the introduction of a new passenger fleet or integration into an existing passenger network or major tunnelling.

There are other examples here, but I am just giving you a snapshot. If you want more detail, I am happy to come back to it. The second fee is the project component fee of (b), which is $140,000 per annum. This would be where the proposed technology is already widely used throughout the Australian rail industry or where the project is being constructed and delivered separately to the end operator or a maintainer. The third one, which is the lowest one, $93,000 per annum, would apply where the project involves substantial extension of infrastructure or substantial rolling stock modifications or where the end operator/maintainer is undertaking the project.

The Hon. J.M.A. LENSINK: Similarly, could the minister provide some examples of the existing projects that will stay within the existing regime of fees, or the current regime of fees if you like, and are there are any projects that the government might be aware of which would fall into these new categories?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: There would be some interstate, but there are none in South Australia at this point in time, or planned in the immediate future, that would fall into that category.

Clause passed.

Remaining clauses (6 to 10) and title passed.

Bill reported without amendment.

Third Reading

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS (Minister for Police, Minister for Correctional Services, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Road Safety) (15:43): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.