Get Involved - Parliament

Transport Administration Amendment (Rms Dissolution) Bill 2019

Published on: August 2019

Record: HANSARD-1323879322-106797

Transport Administration Amendment (RMS Dissolution) Bill 2019

Second Reading Debate

Debate resumed from 1 August 2019.

Mr CHRIS MINNS (Kogarah) (12:16:58):

Before I make a contribution to the Transport Administration Amendment (RMS Dissolution) Bill 2019, I acknowledge Vicky Isabella Weston, is an exchange student from Denmark, who is in the public gallery. It is her birthday, and I welcome her to the Legislative Assembly. The Opposition has been watching the rollout of this legislation very closely since its original introduction as part of the budget omnibus bills in June this year. The legislation was suddenly, and perhaps unexpectedly, introduced in this House and then the other place as part of the budget process while the Government was in the midst of negotiations with the unions. The principles of negotiation with affected unions and workers in those departments is extremely important and one the Opposition holds very dear.

The Daily Telegraph

Heaven forbid, should a clause, condition, benefit or monetary amount that pertains to members of Parliament be talked about, this House would hold weeks of inquiries to investigate, and perhaps fair enough. If a disagreement about the arrangements relating to the parliamentary gymnasium can make the front pages of , it seems in no way unreasonable, illogical or uncooperative that public servants are concerned and, indeed, asking questions about their place of work. It was made more confusing by the fact that the Minister in the other place suggested to the affected unions that legislation was not needed but then introduced it under the cover of the budget bills. It is perhaps unsurprising that schedule 5 of that legislation was not included in the bill before it became law.

It is my understanding that negotiations with the relevant unions have progressed well since the Government's defeat in the other place—perhaps because of that defeat. Several of the issues presented to the Government have been agreed to but remain absent from the legislation at this time. In principle, the Opposition does not oppose the merging of Roads and Maritime Services into the authority of Transport for NSW. It makes sense to us to pursue an administrative and bureaucratic change to rein in the operation and decision-making capabilities of Roads and Maritime Services. It is worrying that an important managerial or strategic change in the administration of transport is being implemented in the ninth year of the New South Wales Government after it has spent, by its own admission, many billions of dollars on the transport and roads portfolios. It is also worrying that although the merger is essential in the proper management of roads, rail, transport and planning, the legislation has in effect been delayed by close to a decade.

Proposed new and extended clearways and alternative business parking on Stoney Creek Road and Forest Road

Opposition members support a process of reining in the approach of Roads and Maritime Services [RMS], due in many respects to our own experiences with the department. In my electorate of Kogarah the Government, through the RMS department, is embarking on what I regard as a senseless decision to place clearways through vibrant town centres like Forest Road at Bexley simply to improve travel time during non‑peak periods. That goes to the short title of the bill about better management of RMS and the transport department, as well as to the shameful document circulated by the Government entitled .

Mr Mark Coure:

But my community loves it; my community wants it.

Mr CHRIS MINNS:

Let me be the first person in Parliament to congratulate the member for Oatley on the birth of his second boy, named Sam.

The SPEAKER:

That is very gracious of the member for Kogarah. I join with him in congratulating Adla, Mark and James on the birth of Sam, but I ask the member for Oatley to resist from interjecting.

Mr CHRIS MINNS:

The proposal would extend clearways in that part of Sydney from 6.00 a.m. to 7.00 p.m. Monday to Friday and 9.00 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. on weekends. I am left with the distinct and troubling realisation that parts of the Government are approaching transport policy on clearways exclusively in the context of the movement of cars, not on the vibrancy of commerce or the provision of employment, and not in the context of economic centres such as Bexley that grow and change. In the many meetings that the member for Kogarah and I have had on those important issues the Chamber of Commerce in Bexley has told us comprehensively that by working together the businesses had lifted Bexley out of the doldrums and turned it into a centre of economic growth and employment. They had worked incredibly hard on it. I am sure Mr Speaker knows that that part of Sydney is not located on a train line, yet those businesses have worked together and made that suburban centre a fantastic magnet for business and commerce.

I am left with the troubling realisation that the Government believes King Street, which is admittedly dense and often congested, is the worst-operating street in Sydney whereas Parramatta Road, which has clearways right through it but in many parts is barren of commercial activity, is the best. If the purpose of the bill is for the new Minister for Transport and Roads to take control of RMS and guide decision‑making so as not to hurt those businesses, particularly by the implementation of clearways, then that is an admirable ambition. I can only guess that it is proposals such as the Bexley clearways, which is spelled out in a document that I am happy to table in the House, that have prompted the Minister to place the merged department at the heart of the transport planning process. Nothing would demonstrate better to the taxpayers of New South Wales a renewed commitment to coordinated planning and resource allocation in transportation than if the Minister in his speech in reply promised to cancel the clearways project in Bexley and save the livelihoods of the people in the businesses affected. It would be a fantastic opportunity for the member for Bega, and Minister for Transport and Roads, to show that he is a fighter for the little guy.

He would be hailed as a fighter for the underdog on the streets of Kogarah. He might not be getting much love from the Minister for Police and Emergency Services, but he would get a lot of love from the shopkeepers in the electorate of Kogarah. As the late Ronald Reagan said, "… government is not the solution to our problems; government is the problem." When it comes to the RMS and its clearway proposal in Bexley, the late Ronald Reagan was right. This is a great opportunity for the Minister to unambiguously say to the people of south-west Sydney that he is on their side. I urge him to make that decision at the earliest available opportunity.

Hansard

The Opposition will not oppose this legislation as it is presented in this House, but we reserve the right to move amendments in the other place to protect in legislative form the rights of workers affected by it. Those amendments have been spelled out in numerous correspondences with the department and Unions NSW. The Minister is well aware of the foreshadowed amendments, but I will outline them in for the benefit of members. We foreshadow that the Opposition will move amendments to ensure: that there is a no net detriment principle applied as a result of the merger; that there be no forced redundancies for a period of four years and that no privatisations be considered for a similar period; that the Government commitment to no job losses extend to Wollongong, Newcastle, the Central Coast and the Blue Mountains; and that Transport for NSW commits to maintaining key conditions in the RMS award. The Opposition will circulate those proposed amendments in the other place well before the Committee stage and will work with affected parties to ensure that to the extent possible the principles mentioned above can be written in legislative form during the amendment phase. During his second reading speech the Minister said:

This reorganisation will deliver better planning and service delivery and, as a result, better outcomes. No matter where you live in this State, the Government has made a very clear commitment that, by merging RMS staff with Transport for NSW staff, we can grow the bureaucracy in the bush. We want to deliver more jobs in the country to better plan our transport, logistics and freight movements across the regions.

That is a laudable goal. I expect that all regional MPs will be lining up to ask the Minister for Transport and Roads exactly how many jobs they can expect in their regional and country electorates over the coming three years. The Opposition will hold the Minister to his august goal. I hope it is not just a stretch goal from Transport for NSW but is what I would consider a rolled gold promise to grow the bureaucracy in the bush and deliver more jobs in the transport cluster to country New South Wales.

I will end with a question for the Minister. Opposition MPs would be interested to hear from him what prompted this legislation in the ninth year of this Government and which of the decisions of his predecessors in the transport ministry, along with his colleagues in roads and Treasury, prompted him to decide that he needs to rein in RMS? What quantum of government money has been spent and in what areas of Sydney that has caused the Minister to be so irritated that he has taken what I regard on the whole to be a laudable decision to merge the departments? It would benefit me, as the newly minted shadow Minister for Transport, to hear which of the Minister colleagues' decisions and decision-making processes he considers to be so subpar that they have made RMS go off the rails, so to speak. What decisions has the Minister seen up close that have gone so far off the rails that he has been prompted to take the pretty extraordinary decision to move RMS into Transport for NSW and have a merger of this scale? Again, I am not criticising the Minister; I am just interested in the decision-making process.

The Opposition will watch this legislation closely. We hope that negotiations between affected public sector unions and the Government are ongoing and that they can be resolved. I can report that in my discussions with the unions I have heard that many of the outstanding issues have been agreed to. I hope that the process continues and that we can have a coordinated transport authority in New South Wales.

Ms FELICITY WILSON (North Shore) (12:29:15):

I am pleased to speak in support of the Transport Administration Amendment (RMS Dissolution) Bill 2019 and to outline the benefits that the reorganisation of the transport cluster will bring to the people of this State. In April the Premier announced the New South Wales Liberal-Nationals Government's key priorities for its term of government. Transport has a critical role to play in delivering on a number of these priorities, including building a stronger economy, delivering well-connected communities with quality local environments and making the customer the centre of everything we do. It is well known that the electorate of North Shore has one of the highest rates of public transport usage across the State. We are also fortunate that a number of local investments are being made in our roads, in the metro and in other transport initiatives. It is important that we reflect on the way in which we make those decisions and administer those projects.

A range of changes have been made to the New South Wales government sector. These changes have been designed to deliver on our priorities and commitments to the community by giving an even greater focus to social reforms and to regional New South Wales. The reorganisation of Transport for NSW is designed to create a fully integrated transport agency capable of delivering on the Government's commitments. The integration of Roads and Maritime Services [RMS] is a sensible and logical next step for Transport for NSW as the lead agency in the transport cluster. It will fully integrate every area of transport under a single and unified banner. It will also break down any residual silos that frustrate effective service delivery, including in regional areas. This bill is an important element in achieving this aim. It will put beyond doubt the merging of the functions of RMS into the transport cluster, and it will ensure that there are no gaps in the proper exercise of those functions.

The Government is determined to continue to deliver on its integrated transport plans for New South Wales, in particular the outcomes set out in the Future Transport Strategy 2056. That strategy is an update of the NSW Long Term Transport Master Plan. It involves a suite of strategies and plans for transport to be developed in concert with the Greater Sydney Commission's Greater Sydney Region Plan, Infrastructure NSW's State Infrastructure Strategy and the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment's regional plans to provide an integrated vision for the State. The Future Transport Strategy 2056 sets out a 40-year vision, directions and outcomes framework for customer mobility in New South Wales. It will guide transport investment over the longer term and be delivered through a series of supporting plans. But to continue to deliver on these plans we must change the way we work.

It is critical that all New South Wales government agencies in the transport cluster look to operate and work together differently. A key ingredient will be Transport for NSW having the right structure in place to ensure that the various areas work more closely together, and to focus on the different needs of urban and regional New South Wales in a holistic way that puts the needs of the customer before the mode of transport. The second ingredient will be to focus on being smarter with taxpayers' money. We recognise that Transport for NSW needs to be smarter in how it uses taxpayers' money so that we can spend more time delivering better customer service. Last, but by no means least, we need to focus on our people—our hardworking public servants in the transport service—so that we can deliver on our commitments to the communities of this great State. The Government is committed to improving the experience of working at Transport for NSW by making it a place where everyone can listen, act, think and lead for the benefit of communities and customers.

In April this year the program of change began and, significantly, staff and unions have been engaged in the process every step of the way. Indeed, staff and union comments and insights informed the final design of the divisional structure, including the settlement of the boundary between the Greater Sydney division and the regional and other metropolitan division. Unions were provided with the boundary proposal and the opportunity to ask questions about how it would work. Their questions were formally responded to. Staff feedback emphasised the safety function of the transport cluster and the significance of its environmental impact, which led to the designation of the safety, environment and regulation division.

Creating new divisions and assigning staff to them is an important first step; it is hardly the end of the story. The transformation of Transport for NSW into an integrated transport agency that takes a holistic approach to the challenge of facilitating multimodal, safe and sustainable transport services for the urban and regional communities of this State will take time, and it will require further input from staff and unions. I am informed that senior managers at Transport for NSW are holding regular briefing sessions with staff to inform them of developments and to provide opportunities for feedback and input into the establishment of the new divisions. At the same time, senior leaders of the cluster are also holding regular consultation sessions with employee representative bodies, in accordance with the provisions of relevant industrial awards. This collaborative approach is to be applauded. Bringing staff together on designing and delivering customer‑centred, safe and sustainable services is the way forward.

In my electorate of North Shore we are heavily reliant on a range of different initiatives that the Government is undertaking, particularly in transport. I will go through some of those. My community does not see transport, roads, cycling and active transport as different functions of our government and services. My community sees it as all about journeys—how to get from A to B in a safe and efficient way. Currently a number of different projects are underway in my electorate, the most exciting of which—I have to choose between a few— is the Sydney Metro project. We have allocated another $5.3 billion over four years for the next stage of the project, including work at the Victoria Cross, North Sydney, and the Crows Nest metro stations—and I was at Crows Nest for both of the tunnel‑boring machine breakthroughs.

I congratulate the Minister for Transport and Roads on the work he is doing and the whole Sydney Metro team. The turn‑up‑and‑go service that has been so incredibly welcomed in the north‑west will be a completely game‑changing project for my community; adding new metro stations at Crows Nest and Victoria Cross is an investment in the mobility and accessibility of my constituents. To think of what is happening underground in our city every single day, I commend the project team on the work they are doing to minimise the impacts on our communities and for making sure that they are communicating the whole way. Shortly the tunnel‑boring machine will arrive at Victoria Cross, North Sydney. That will be an exciting day for our community—the next phase in bringing the metro to North Sydney and the North Shore.

The Sydney Metro program also supports the school apprenticeship program. It is important to reflect on the role of Government in investing in skills for the future and the way in which we use government infrastructure projects to catalyse skills growth and development for students across the State. I met with two of those students at the Crows Nest metro. One was working in construction and was the only girl on the project. She was eager to go into a construction role after completing her studies. I also met a young man who was working in the finance side of the project. The skills that we are investing in our students will give them pathways into the future. It is something the Government should be congratulated on.

The Western Harbour Tunnel and Beaches Link project is probably the next most exciting project for my electorate—for probably 40 years or so it has been called for. We are now at a point where the arterial roads— Military and Spit roads—are already over capacity. That is spilling through to the back streets, which are residential and have become rat runs, significantly impacting local communities. The only government that would deliver the Western Harbour Tunnel and Beaches Link is a Liberal government, and we have made that commitment. In the next financial year we have budgeted $165 million to progress the crucial planning and preconstruction stage. The tunnel itself will have a transformational impact on the local community. It is expected to reduce travel times to North Sydney and Mosman upwards of 30 per cent, with the expectation of reducing traffic across the Spit Bridge by up to 15 per cent.

Mr James Griffin:

Hear, hear!

Ms FELICITY WILSON:Extension of time

I acknowledge the member for Manly's excitement about the tunnel and about getting traffic off my local streets. I acknowledge the work of the Western Harbour Tunnel and Beaches Link team within the Transport for New South Wales cluster and the work that they are doing to get this project right for our community. As I mentioned earlier with the metro, there are often impacts on our communities with these major transformational infrastructure projects. But I applaud the work they are doing to minimise those impacts. []

So much transport is happening in my electorate of North Shore that I wanted to speak a bit more about it. I now move on to our buses. If anyone has not been on the B‑line buses, I implore them to get on board. Those buses are the most exciting change in public transport, before the metro turned up, that anyone could experience. Cruising across the Harbour Bridge on the top deck of a B‑line bus is a beautiful experience; you do not get the same views as you do in a car or on a single-decker bus. It has significantly changed traffic flows on Military Road and eased the congestion that we are facing on our local streets and on those residential back streets. People constantly stop me in the street to tell me how much they love the B‑line and what a wonderful service it is—they love the new buses. This is something that is really part of the transformational attitude we have towards customer service and towards getting passenger journeys right. We have also made a number of other changes to get things right for our local community. One of those is introducing new stops for Spit Junction on the E88 and E89 bus routes to make sure that we have got the right level of services for our communities. We will continue investing in our bus services to make sure that we can have a safe, reliable commute for my communities.

There probably is no better way to commute than across Sydney Harbour on a ferry. Our ferry customers are receiving a major boost with additional services. During our last term of government we introduced the new F4 Cross Harbour and F7 Double Bay ferry routes. The F4 improved the connections between the North Shore, the Eastern Suburbs and the Sydney CBD, so it was really the first ferry route that connected the North Shore, the Eastern Suburbs and the city. It connected into us at Milsons Point and McMahons Point. I know that has been greatly appreciated, particularly with the connection into Barangaroo as well.

We have also announced that we are going to undertake upgrades to the wharf at High Street in North Sydney, South Mosman wharf and Taronga Zoo wharf to improve accessibility and service provision there. I know that people love our ferry services and they also love the new Emerald class of ferries, which have capacity for 400 customers and provide improved access for our less mobile customers, including people with prams—something that the Assistant Speaker and I know a lot about—and make sure that people can get around safely and efficiently.

I turn to the way in which our local train services are being addressed, particularly by the Minister and by Transport for NSW, by this approach to customer service and by ensuring we are getting things right for not just those who use our services but also those who are impacted by them. I acknowledge and thank the Chief Executive Officer of Sydney Trains, Howard Collins, who joined me last week in Wollstonecraft with the Waverton Wollstonecraft Rail Noise Action Group—a group that the Assistant Speaker in a previous role as parliamentary secretary had also met with—and progressed their concerns about significant levels of rail noise along the Waverton‑Wollstonecraft rail bends, which are the tightest bends in the Sydney rail network.

Howard Collins had been to the location on a number of occasions and is working through a series of different initiatives to improve and reduce the noise impacts on our community. Sydney Trains has done that, for instance, by introducing TORFMAs—that is top of rail friction modification agents—which are effectively lubricants for the trains. Sydney Trains is also starting a trial on dampeners to try to impact that noise. I know that Sydney Trains is going to keep working on new ideas and initiatives to make sure that we minimise the impacts that our network can have on residents, particularly the downstream impacts of some of our incredible investments in increasing public transport services. I will keep working with Sydney Trains and with the Minister and his team on that.

Lastly I reflect on one of the bugbears of my community that we are still working on a solution for, and that is the Beauty Point rat run. Yesterday I met with representatives of RMS—now under the Transport for NSW cluster—and spoke with them about this again. Those who live on the other side of the Spit, like the member for Manly, would know that Beauty Point has some beautiful residential streets and some tight, narrow streets going past Beauty Point Public School, which have been used for a long time as a rat run for residents from the northern beaches to try to avoid Military Road. One of the reasons we are doing so much work to reduce the level of congestion on Military Road is to take that pressure off our backstreets.

I have previously asked the Minister for Transport and Roads for Beauty Point rat run to be closed to traffic entering from Spit Road, and today I reiterate that request. It is important for us to think about local safety and the risks and hazards that are faced by my local residents in Beauty Point. I will continue to advocate for that closure and for additional changes to be made to make our back roads safe, because while we know we are in between the city and many people's homes and are seen as a place that people commute through, these are also our homes, our streets and our schools. We want to make sure they are safe for our kids getting to and from school.

I thank the Minister and his team, the previous Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight, Melinda Pavey, and former Roads and Maritime Services agency staff for the way that issue has been approached. They are working on it. It is an incredibly challenging issue for us but I will continue to ensure that I advocate for the interests of my community in that way. As I said, this bill is necessary but alone it is not sufficient to ensure that Transport for NSW is best placed to deliver on the priorities of the New South Wales Liberal‑Nationals Government. The bill is Parliament's opportunity to ensure that the great collaborative and customer-focused work that is already being done within the cluster is adequately supported by an appropriate legislative framework. I commend the bill to the House.

Ms JO HAYLEN (Summer Hill) (12:44:02):

I speak on the Transport Administration Amendment (RMS Dissolution) Bill 2019. This bill provides a legislative framework to integrate Transport for NSW and Roads and Maritime Services [RMS] into a consolidated transport authority. Schedule 1 dissolves RMS and transfers its functions, assets, rights and liabilities to Transport for NSW. As outlined in the Minister's second reading speech, schedule 2 makes consequential amendments that give effect to the dissolution of RMS in the Roads Act 1993 and other transport related regulations. Along with my Labor colleagues I support this bill in principle and acknowledge the potential public policy benefits of a consolidated agency with responsibility for transport and roads in New South Wales.

I hope that this will end a siloed approach that has facilitated the Government's continued obsession with toll roads at the expense of public transport, pedestrians and cyclists. I hope it will see public transport advocates given equal importance, which I note was not the case when the Government excluded public transport options in the business case to justify WestConnex. I hope that this merger will give greater prominence to active transport projects and corridors as championed by residents, organisations and indeed the Great Sydney Commission. I hope it will mean genuine consultation is finally given to how we may retrofit our suburbs to improve walkability and transport access. And I hope it will mean we design greenfield developments in ways that increase public transport.

Since being elected as the member for Summer Hill in 2015, I have worked with countless residents to oppose and mitigate the very worst of this Government's WestConnex project. The project has been an unmitigated disaster for so many inner west residents, particularly those in Haberfield, Ashfield and St Peters. In this place I have regularly raised issues such as unfair property acquisitions, the levelling of irreplaceable Federation homes, construction chaos, rat-running, as well as significant health concerns—including air pollution and asbestos management in the construction phase—raised by residents who are living right next to the construction of this project. Despite its impacts, the Government has continued to add more and more arms to this tollway—despite clear evidence that public transport would better serve our growing city.

Labor has consistently argued that the discount rate formula applied to infrastructure cost-benefit analysis needs to change. The Grattan Institute reports that slashing the current 7 per cent rate would increase the attractiveness of rail and public transport projects. It has been also been revealed that public transport options were excluded when considering the business case for WestConnex. That is as clear an indication as you can get that the Government's interests tend to lie with roads over rail or other public transport. In her testimony to the parliamentary inquiry into WestConnex, Dr Michelle Zeibots, a transport expert from the University of Technology Sydney said:

… I believe that many people within TfNSW at that time as well as the Minister did comprehend the need to improve public transport, but were 'out manoeuvred' by others in their political party who preferred urban motorway development. That these same people do not rely on empirical data or a strong 'evidence base' when formulating their positions is evident in the stark difference between the material outcomes that have been achieved by these motorways and the 'beliefs and ideals' expressed before construction that were used to justify them.

While the M4 East tunnels opened a few weeks ago, we have still not seen the two lanes of dedicated rapid transit that the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces promised in his conditions of consent to the project. Reports suggesting that the Government is now looking to push the promise out by potentially five years—but in fact there is no set timetable—and to suggest that we will satisfy those conditions of the consent with a rail project that will not be built for years is frankly unbelievable and betrays the communities along Parramatta Road. I call on the Minister to deliver on his promise and on his conditions of consent and to deliver that public transport along Parramatta Road. The community is right to look at the Government's track record when it comes to the bill before us—the consolidation of RMS and Transport for NSW. The community does not accept and nor indeed do those of us on this side of the House accept an arrangement that sees much-needed transport priorities for our city and our State consumed instead with an ideological obsession with toll roads.

This bill was first proposed in conjunction with budget bills but it has been delayed as a result of pressure on the Government to properly engage with the affected workers and the unions that represent them. The merger impacts countless workers across the transport and road industries and, as flagged by the shadow Minister the member for Kogarah, there are a number of very reasonable expectations that must be met for those workers.

I will highlight those four expectations. The first is that a no net detriment principle applies and that any disagreement be referred to the Industrial Relations Commission [IRC]. The second is that there be no forced redundancies for a period of four years and that no privatisations be considered in that time. The third is that the Government extend its "no regional job loss" commitment to Wollongong, Newcastle, the Central Coast and the Blue Mountains. The fourth is that the Government commit to maintaining key conditions in the RMS awards. Let us be clear: Industrial matters are very important to these workers. Their expectations are reasonable and the level of concern is understandable.

The Government has privatised Sydney ferries, Newcastle buses and inner west buses and there are rumours that more privatisation of bus services is to come. The Minister has made it clear on a number of occasions, including in his second reading speech on this bill, that he sees the future of transportation in New South Wales as fully automated. It is understandable that that causes a level of distress for the workers within the industry. In fact, the Minister noted that a move to full automation was one of the pressing needs for this bill.

The Sydney Morning Herald

Last month revealed Transport for NSW's reform program through a series of freedom of information requests. The documents, dated March this year, reveal plans to raise public transport fares; to sell, rezone or develop hundreds of State-owned properties; to overhaul road levies; and "to cut up to $1.9 billion a year from staff costs within 10 years". The Minister needs to make clear that this bill is not about reducing our transport workforce. He needs to make a clear commitment that the jobs of those affected by this merger are safe and clearly indicate that this bill is not about further sell-offs of public transport.

The proposed merger has raised many opportunities and, frankly, many hopes in the community and amongst stakeholders working in and around active transport. For too long the needs of pedestrians and cyclists have been sidelined by RMS in favour of the flow of traffic. Our city is now paying big time for the preferential treatment that is given to cars. Sydney is creaking at the seams. Congestion on our roads is a critical issue affecting workers, families and our economy. I have long argued that active transport is a critical piece of the puzzle in reducing congestion on our roads, improving our health, strengthening communities and reducing carbon emissions.

Pulse of Greater SydneyExtension of time

Improving walkability is a key indicator for the Greater Sydney Commission in its objective to "celebrate diversity and put people at the heart of planning". Its document, released only a few weeks ago, reports that 18 per cent of all trips taken in the Greater Sydney region in 2017‑18 were walking trips. That is not many, so there is plenty of room for improvement. However, when we dig deeper into the data, a different but important story emerges. In the city's eastern district—home to many of our more affluent suburbs—32 per cent of all trips were walking trips. The walking rate in the central Sydney district stands at 15 per cent; in the western district of the city the figure is a low 10 per cent. []

That means that nine times out of 10 western Sydney residents are getting into their car to go to work, to school or to the shops. Why? What is different for a person who lives in Penrith compared to a person who lives in Paddington? Let us be clear: It is not that one group loves their car or that one group just loves to walk. That is not the case at all. There is a clear discrepancy in the infrastructure available for those who wish to walk or cycle in western Sydney. I am talking about shaded, pleasant and interesting footpaths to walk on or safe, separated cycleways to ride on. In many parts of western Sydney those options are just not available. We are not moving quickly enough to invest properly in that infrastructure to make connected, walkable suburbs, particularly in greenfield developments. So many of our suburbs are built for cars, with twisting cul-de-sacs that privilege driving and literally put up walls to walking.

We need to focus on policies that make walking and cycling real options for everyone across Greater Sydney. For example, how can we make travelling to and from school by foot or by bike safer for kids, including fixing the ridiculous formula that is currently used to allocate crossing guards and pedestrian crossings around schools? How can we re‑conceive our roads to give greater access and prominence to pedestrians and cyclists, including amending the hierarchies of our roads to give greater prominence to active transport corridors? When investing in big ticket transport infrastructure, what opportunities are we missing to include alternative modes of active transport? What innovations can change the way we move in the future, including the uptake of electronic bikes, scooters and skateboards?

Many active transport stakeholders have reported to me that they are hopeful that this bill will provide a new platform and greater prominence for active transport solutions. I am an optimist but the Government's record on active transport demands scrutiny. Since coming to power in 2011 the Government has declared a war on cyclists. It has ripped up cycleways and increased fines on cyclists. The Government also contemplated forcing cyclists, including children, to have a licence and to register their bikes. The Government talks a very big game on active transport but still we see only a very small proportion of the budget spent on active transport. Of the $15.1 billion allocated to new transport capital expenditure in the most recent budget, only 0.38 per cent, or $57 million, will be invested in new walking and cycling infrastructure projects. That is very little when we consider that every one of us is an active transport user, every one of us walks daily.

Global Outlook on Walking and Cycling

In comparison, in its publication the United Nations recommends that governments should spend 20 per cent of their total transport budget on non‑motorised and active transport. That is 20 per cent versus 0.38 per cent. Despite big promises in the New South Wales election, we are still waiting to see the money from this Government flow to some of the projects it promised, including, for example, the inner west GreenWay, which has been delayed by years due to delays in approvals from Sydney Trains. Similarly, the Eastern Suburbs cycleway has been tied up in red tape and awaiting approvals. The Minister has been silent on the Sydney Cycle Network and the flagged trials of electronic scooters have been on again/off again and the Government does not seem to have a solution in sight. A lot of money was promised but those projects have been held up and have not progressed. As a result, we are all losing out. I remind the House that every one of us partakes in active transport every day. We must make those options real options for everyone across Greater Sydney. I hope that this bill will reform the siloed approach we have seen so far and will support active transport as a real option for Sydney.

Mr PAUL TOOLE (BathurstMinister for Regional Transport and Roads) (12:58:15):

— I am pleased to support the Transport Administration Amendment (RMS Dissolution) Bill 2019 and to outline to members the benefits that the reorganisation of the transport cluster will bring to the people of this State, particularly to those living in regional communities. The bill will focus on bringing together two separate parts of the transport cluster: Transport for NSW and Roads and Maritime Services. The Roads and Maritime Services will be dissolved and the bill provides that its functions will in future be performed by Transport for NSW. The transport cluster is being reorganised to deliver better integrated service delivery across all modes, to keep driving better customer outcomes and to put a greater focus on creating better places for people across New South Wales no matter where they live.

This includes the creation of a new regional and outer metropolitan division focused on addressing the distinct needs of communities outside Greater Sydney—in particular, supporting the delivery of the Government's big, bold vision for improving roads and transport connectivity in the bush. The greater focus on regional areas will ensure that decision-making happens at the appropriate level to ensure that local community needs are met in a timely manner. The new regional division will try new things. The Government will do things differently in our regions. We will respond to the needs of customers in regional New South Wales. That is why we have already announced that we will look at new bus trials and train routes.

This is about going into isolated communities. This is about providing connectivity. This is about providing opportunity for those people to live longer in their homes. The benefit provided by these train routes and new coaches will support those communities and give the people in those regional areas the same level of access that those in metropolitan communities might already experience. We have communities that are growing. We have identified additional bus services to be provided for regional growth communities. Only recently I was out at Parkes, which has just invested in a new transit lounge. Why is this important? It means that now those in the surrounding villages and towns will be able to come to Parkes and stop over in the transit lounge before they have that connectivity—whether it be a cab, a coach or train services—to link up with other communities. This is what the Government is doing. The bill will ensure that we strongly support those in regional communities.

The integration of Roads and Maritime services functions and work teams into Transport for NSW is a key component of the transport cluster reorganisation. It will provide customers and the community with full integration of every area of transport under a single and unified transport banner. Transport for NSW, and Roads and Maritime Services already work very closely together on a day-to-day basis. In regional areas many offices and worksites are already co-located. This is not expected to change. However, through the bill the full integration of Roads and Maritime Services into Transport for NSW will mean there are no organisational barriers to realising the full benefits of integrated and coordinated services. It will also ensure the breaking down of any residual silos that frustrate effective service delivery. It will encourage even closer collaboration to ensure that we take a holistic view of the challenges and opportunities that exist in regional areas. Importantly, this integration will not result in job losses in rural and regional areas.

This is the next logical step for Transport for NSW. It will ensure all parts of the business are focused on delivering the Government's Future Transport 2056 strategy. Integrating Roads and Maritime Services into Transport for NSW will make it a lot easier for customers, industry, councils and other government agencies to effectively engage in transport matters. Integration will result in increased accountability and transparency for all transport stakeholders involved. The new operating model will ensure decision-making happens in a timely matter, and decisions truly reflect customer needs and expectations. The new operating model also means resources will be better targeted to areas of greatest need and priority. It will encourage better coordination and collaboration, allowing Transport to respond nimbly and creatively to changes in the operating environment. Transport is a technology business; it is in a period of unrivalled growth, change and disruption. The new operating model will position Transport to be more agile in responding to emerging challenges and to identifying ways that improved transport connectivity can unlock opportunity for individuals and business.

The new Transport for NSW structure includes two new geographically focused service and operational divisions—one focusing on Greater Sydney and the other on the diverse regions of our State outside of Sydney. These new divisions will provide a single point of accountability for the transport and road networks in any given community in New South Wales. The two divisions are focused on providing a customer and community‑focused approach to planning and delivery. This will make it easier for customers and communities to engage with Transport for NSW. The Greater Sydney division includes Sydney Trains, Sydney Metro and the State Transit Authority with the chief executives of each of these entities committed to working closely and cooperatively with the deputy secretary of that division to ensure integrated service delivery and operations in the Greater Sydney area. The maritime division of the current Roads and Maritime Services is also located in this division and it is that part of Roads and Maritime Services known as RMS Sydney division.

The regional and outer metropolitan division focuses on the regions as well as Newcastle and Wollongong. It includes NSW TrainLink and the RMS regional and freight division, except for that part of the division dealing with freight that has transitioned to the Freight team in another part of the new Transport for NSW, the customer strategy and technology division. Again, this will ensure integrated service delivery and operations in the diverse regions of our State focusing on the varying needs and challenges that arise in different locations. With this bill the New South Wales Government is once again demonstrating its commitment to the regions. As we have said, all the time, it is the New South Wales Liberal-Nationals Government that recognises that many in our regional and rural communities are doing it tough. Better connecting our communities and unlocking opportunities through improved transport and road links will be a key priority for this Government. This bill will support those connections. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr STEPHEN KAMPER (Rockdale) (13:06:00):

I speak briefly on the Transport Administration Amendment (RMS Dissolution) Bill 2019. I say at the outset that while Labor is not opposed to this bill we will move amendments in the other place. As many members in this place would know, Roads and Maritime Services[RMS] has increasingly become a law unto itself. I can only hope that through this merger process the cowboy attitude of the RMS will be reined in, although I am worried that it may simply create a bigger bully. It would come as no surprise to members of this place that community support for road projects is perhaps at its lowest level ever. This is despite increased congestion and travel times constricting the growth of our city. However, when you look at the way the RMS has taken to consulting with local communities when rolling out any new infrastructure project it becomes clear why there is so much community resentment at their actions.

During the recent proposal for 24-hour clearways along Stoney Creek Road and Forest Road in the St George area, it has quite frankly been insulting how little regard the RMS has paid to my community's views. The RMS has advertised community consultation events that it has simply not turned up to. It has failed to return calls from interested residents. One local councillor was even told that the RMS representatives would not speak with council at all. Where an agency like the RMS would have once sent out traffic engineers and professional experts to engage with concerned locals, it now hires agency temps with no experience or interest in the area of roads and transport so that it can tick the box that it has engaged with the community. When did the RMS forget that it was a public service, there to serve the public and not its own agenda?

On the upside, an integrated approach to transport and roads in New South Wales is long overdue. We must recognise that our public transport and road systems do not operate independently of each other. It is mad to have two agencies that have to work in tandem, often at loggerheads over priorities and budgeting. Hopefully, this merger will result in the Government abandoning its ideological worship of new toll roads and starting to allow genuine cost-benefit comparisons of public transport projects against the new roads. In 2017 leaked cabinet documents revealed that train journey times from Wollongong to Sydney would be slashed by up to 20 minutes if the Government built a $3.6 billion rail tunnel. Thousands of people already commute from Wollongong to Sydney for work every day. This investment would have given Wollongong commuters another half hour with their families every single day as well as eased the strain of population growth in metropolitan Sydney by allowing more people to make that journey. Instead, billions of dollars are being spent on the first stage of the F6 extension—a four-kilometre tunnel that starts and ends in my electorate of Rockdale that the RMS's own figures show will significantly increase traffic congestion on local streets. One would be forgiven for thinking this white-elephant project was designed to funnel more traffic into the WestConnex to fatten it up for sale. This Ponzi scheme approach to public policy that the RMS seems to have adopted cannot go on, and I hope this merger will be the last bizarre decision it makes—although I somewhat doubt it.

Just over the six months to June this year travel times along many major arterial roads have continued to increase. Travel times on Alison Road in Sydney's eastern suburbs are 15 per cent worse in the morning peak and 20 per cent worse in the evening peak. Travel times on Camden Valley Way in south-west Sydney have become 50 per cent worse during the evening peak, and Campbelltown Road is 10 per cent to 20 per cent worse. Castle Hill Road in north-west Sydney is more than 15 per cent worse in both the morning and evening peaks. It takes twice as long to travel along the Eastern Distributor than it did six months ago. General Holmes Drive is nearly 10 per cent worse in the mornings—as I experienced this morning—and 40 per cent worse in the evenings. Heathcote Road is nearly 10 per cent worse during both the morning and evening peaks, as are Homebush Drive and the Hume Highway. The M4 between Eastern Creek and Clyde is nearly 50 per cent worse in the morning peak than it was six months ago, as is the M5 and the M5 East during the evening peak.

Outside Sydney, Maitland Road is 50 per cent slower in the morning and evening; Mona Vale Road is more than 10 per cent slower in the morning; Narellan Road is 30 per cent slower in the morning and 10 per cent slower in the evening; the Newcastle Link Road is10 per cent slower in the morning and 5 per cent slower in the evening; Old Windsor Road is more than 10 per cent slower in the morning and 5 per cent slower in the evening; the Pacific Highway past Newcastle is more than 5 per cent slower in both the morning and the evening; Rookwood Road is 20 per cent worse during the morning peak; Seven Hills Road is more than 10 per cent worse inbound and outbound; Springhill Road in Wollongong is 20 per cent worse during the evening peak; and The Grand Parade in my electorate is more than 10 per cent worse in the mornings than it was six months ago. Across New South Wales commutes are becoming longer every month, which is creating justified distrust in the RMS.

It is little wonder that the people of New South Wales are increasingly sceptical of road projects when they are treated with such open contempt by the responsible agency. It shows disdain for real community consultation while outcomes continue to decline. The RMS needs to listen to local communities instead of pretending that it knows what is best for them. Despite decades of promises, endless political discussion and pointscoring, daily commutes are longer and congestion is worse. Sydney is the undisputed congestion capital of Australia—a truly shameful title. The people of New South Wales are badly in need of solutions and the RMS is badly in need of an attitude change. Perhaps being subsumed into Transport for NSW may offer that change, although I would like to see it first. The Minister for Transport and Roads is not the most popular person on the other side of the House at the moment but I have great hopes that he will be able to deliver some real reform, not just another rebranding exercise.

Ms ELENI PETINOS (Miranda) (13:13:17):

I support the Transport Administration Amendment (RMS Dissolution) Bill 2019. The purpose of the bill is to dissolve Roads and Maritime Services [RMS] and transfer its assets, rights, liabilities and functions to Transport for NSW. Roads and Maritime Services was established on 1 November 2011 under section 46 of the Transport Administration Act 1988 and is the operating agency delivering value for New South Wales customers and the community through safe, efficient and quality road and maritime networks as part of the transport system. The RMS manages a network that includes 18,000 kilometres of State roads, nearly 3,000 kilometres of regional and local roads, 5,000 bridges and major culverts, 22 tunnels, 4,000 traffic signal sites and approximately 12,000 other traffic facilities, systems and corridor assets. The list goes on.

This network demonstrates the importance of roads to the New South Wales Government and the people of New South Wales. Let me state this very clearly: The transport cluster is being reorganised to deliver a better customer experience to the people of New South Wales, no matter where they live. We are putting the needs of customers first and the mode of transport second. The new operating model will put transport in the pole position to deliver on the Premier's Priorities for the current term of government, including the focus on well-connected communities with quality local environments and putting the customer at the centre of everything we do.

The Premier announced the restructure of the New South Wales Government sector, including the merging of Transport for NSW and Roads and Maritime Services, in early April this year. On 4 April 2019, two days after the new Cabinet was sworn in, the first meeting with employee representatives and parties took place. Transport for NSW has met with the unions at least 13 times since the integration was announced. This includes a number of meetings and consultation sessions following presentation of the previous version of this bill to the Parliament, which members will recall the Labor Party opposed. The reality is that last month members of the Labor Party voted to retain what was formerly the Roads and Traffic Authority and is now Roads and Maritime Services and leave it to operate in a silo.

Debate interrupted.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER:

I shall now leave the chair. The House will resume at 2.15 p.m.