APPROPRIATION BILL (NO. 1) 2012-2013 – CONSIDERATION IN DETAIL (INFRASTRUCTURE AND TRANSPORT PORTFOLIO)
May 30, 2012
Mr CHESTER (Gippsland) (16:48): I would like to draw the minister’s attention to the Princes Highway in south-east Australia, which he is very familiar with, and I thank him for his correspondence on this issue. This relates also to the seat of Eden-Monaro. The issue I refer to is the duplication works between Traralgon and Sale, where $140 million has been committed by the federal government and $35 million by the state. I seek clarification about the government’s position on the re-profiling of the $20 million, which has been extended out from the previous financial year and which I understand was an EPBC-related issue. In that context, I would be interested in your thoughts, Minister, on what extra costs these EPBC-related issues are adding to the road construction bill in Australia. I am finding in my electorate that road construction not referred to the EPBC is extraordinarily frustrating for the local community and roads are being realigned in a manner not consistent with what was expected when the reserves were put aside in the first place. I would be interested in what reforms the government has in mind in relation to that, but more particularly about the $20 million which has been re-profiled. I know the minister understands that this is a much larger project than the $140 million which has already been allocated. I would be interested to know the minister’s view in terms of any future funding commitments to that section of the road.
More broadly, Minister, I want to refer you to the Princes Highway east across Victoria and into the seat of Eden-Monaro. I have the figures in front of me for 2005 to 2010 when, from Sale to the New South Wales border, there were 22 fatalities and 116 serious injuries on that stretch of road. I am not sure what happens after that, in Eden-Monaro, but I am sure the member can tell us.
This road is not on the national network—I appreciate that—but on that stretch of road between Wollongong and Sale some off-network projects are being undertaken with support from the federal government for the Bega bypass. What is the government’s attitude to the status of the highway from Wollongong through Eden-Monaro and Gippsland to Sale, where it joins up with the national road network section on which work is currently underway?
This area has quite significant heavy vehicle usage, with the timber industry, the fishing industry, the moving of agricultural products and the local and tourism related traffic increasing. Does the government see this as a priority? What advice do you have for the communities along that route to get more of the federal-funding pie to ensure we improve the safety and productivity of the road in that region? I would appreciate your feedback.
Mr ALBANESE (Grayndler—Leader of the House and Minister for Infrastructure and Transport) (16:50): I thank the member for Gippsland for his question. He is a strong advocate for his local community. We have some political differences, but I have no doubt that he is a genuine advocate for additional money to be spent in his community. He would never take the attitude of arguing against funding for his areas that some on that side of the House seem to take.
With regard to the Traralgon to Sale section, yes, the deferral of some of that funding was because we pay against milestone achievements. The EPBC environmental approvals meant that the state government requested a deferral essentially because the money could not be spent at that time. My advice from meetings with Minister Mulder from Victoria, with whom I have a very good and constructive relationship, has been that there has not been a request for additional funding—that is, an argument that because of the deferral the costs would increase. For a number of recent projects in Victoria there were cost increases, while for some projects there were cost savings. We have constructively worked through those issues, so I am confident that we could work through those issues with the Victorian government. People would be aware that there is a current commitment to the $175 million project, jointly funded with $140 million from the Commonwealth and $35 million from the state government.
With regard to issues with the highway beyond Sale, the section of the Princes Highway that the member refers to is a state road and the responsibility of the Victorian government. We have not had representation from the Victorian government for additional funding that I am aware of. There may well have been representations to the department, but none I am aware of from direct discussions I have had with Minister Mulder, the most recent of which were face-to-face discussions two weeks ago when I had two meetings with Minister Mulder, one in Victoria and one in South Australia at the ministerial council meeting. I would invite the member to have further discussions with me to find a constructive way of dealing with this.
In answer to the member’s questions, we have had funding for projects including on the other side of the border, such as for the Bega bypass. I think that is now fully federally funded after we made a commitment to get it done. It is unfortunate that state governments of various persuasions have not all come on board with funding for that project. The member for Eden-Monaro, Mike Kelly, has been an extraordinary advocate. In two weeks we will be in Bega commencing construction of that road, an important part of nation building program 1.
Importantly, on state government negotiations, nation building program 2 will commence from 2014-15 going forward. State governments are preparing submissions both to the federal government and through the Infrastructure Australia process. It is unlikely the Princes Highway funding will be prioritised by Infrastructure Australia, because IA looks at benefit-cost ratios and it would be difficult to progress it through a productivity inspired funding recommendation process. That is not to say that that should be dismissed. Productivity is, of course, vital and the economic utility of one project versus another has to be analysed.
We also have to look at issues such as road safety. I do point out to the member that we had in the budget the Roads to Recovery program in terms of local government funding extended and an increase in the Black Spot Program that has been very effective in delivering projects that save lives on our roads.