SAFC’s RegulatoryPriorities

Evan Knapp, Consultant

SAFC Conference 2015

SAFC Advocacy

• SAFC represents YOU - the South Australian Freight & Logistics Industry and its key customers - to parliaments and governments; government instrumentalities (including departments, agencies, commissions, regulators and Inquiries) as well as to the media and general public.

SAFC Advocacy

• This advocacy is both re-active (following government initiatives and commenting on government papers, strategies, plans etc) and proactive – with our suite of policy papers:

Coming Soon!

Regulating Freight

• SAFC’s principal public policy statement on Regulatory matters

• Last published in 2008• Why are we updating this now?

– Held off republishing due to the advent of the three National Regulators – the impact of these is generally now known and can be analysed.

– Generally a poor level of change achieved for the T&L industry over the last 7 years – SA is slipping behind

– Opportunity to benchmark results against the 2008 document – a scorecard.

– Opportunity to affect government policy now, AND– Opportunity to lay the groundwork for the next election cycle.

Timeline

• Project scope developed January 2015• Executive Committee sign off• Initial research and drafting Feb – April• Targeted issues generation & consultation, particularly

on National Regulators – March • Regulatory papers forum May 2015 – SAFC member

input received• Redrafting and tightening June – September

– (particularly taking into account announced changes & issued government documents)

• Final drafting and consultation NOW• Release before the end of the year

Proposed Content

• In draft form, subject to change• Standard inclusions

– Chairman’s Statement– Executive Summary– Introduction

• Core Regulatory Principles– Facilitation/Cultural Change – A Partnership Approach– Communication/Consultation– Outcomes-Based Approach – Principle for Adoption and Review (reducing red tape)– Harmonisation– Development of a “Light-Handed” Regime

Harmonisation and the Three Regulators

• A discussion (and grading) of the implementation of each regulator and a current operational rating.

• Recommendations for improvement• If you disagree with any rating or have had issues with

any of the regulators, please let us know.• Australian Maritime Safety Authority (National Maritime

Safety Regulator)– Implementation Rating: A; Current Operational Rating: A– A smooth transition, which was to be expected given the

(relatively) small addition of responsibility to an already established entity.

Harmonisation and the Three Regulators

• Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator – Implementation rating: C (two states missing, some

other inconsistencies); Current operational rating B-/C+– Relatively smooth transition– SLA’s – lack of a common regulatory culture, cost savings

lost due to inconsistency– Reports of ‘Conditions on accreditation’ becoming more

prescriptive– Audits taking too long – over 6 months between audit

and audit report

Harmonisation and the Three Regulators

• ONRSR– Draft recommendations:

• that Commonwealth rail infrastructure funding is linked to the passing of the Rail Safety National Law and Regulations by states. (Thus the ‘Inland Rail’ Project from Qld to Vic through NSW would require the Queensland Government to implement the RSNL and join the Regulator).

• That SLA’s are reviewed every 2 years, with a requirement to deliver either cost or other efficiencies or be scrapped, with staff joining the ONRSR. Review reports must be made public for transparency reasons.

• That the ONRSR sets a standard of completing all audit reports within 2 months of the date of audit; and reports against this target publically in the ONRSR Annual Report.

• That the RSNL and ONRSR are independently reviewed by the end of 2018, with a view to removing inconsistencies and gaining further consolidation benefits. The RSNL review should include consideration of public trespass incidents causing safety issues. It would be appropriate for the RSNL review to be undertaken by the NTC.

Harmonisation and the Three Regulators

• National Heavy Vehicle Regulator– Implementation rating: E; Current operational rating C- (with

an improving trend)– Draft text notes how this regulator is orders of magnitude

larger in scope than rail or sea.– Intention of discussion in this section is to support the NHVR

(as a concept) while outlining where improvements can be made

– A major problem is the right of road managers (State departments (inc DPTI) and local councils) to veto HV access applications, and then preside over their own appeals process (administrative justice issue)

Harmonisation and the Three Regulators

• National Heavy Vehicle Regulator– Draft Recommendations:

• that the NHVR be reviewed in 3 years (late 2018), giving the regulator time to make further gains. From an industry viewpoint, going backwards is not an option.

• that two industry representatives are added to the NHVR board – One from a large trucking firm and one from a small trucking firm (≤10 trucks) to provide an industry perspective to NHVR Board decision making.

• that the HVNL is amended to pass the final right of review on access issues to the NHVR, where an operator appeals an access decision made by a road manager.

Seven Years of Progress?Issue Responsible Progress/Rating

Review of the Adelaide Airport Curfew

Commonwealth Government

3/5 (Some Progress). Although some amendments have recently been made, many of the issues previously outlined still exist.

Facilitate access for larger road freight vehicles

State Government(and now some NHVR responsibilities)

2/5 (Poor). Progress has been made in some key areas, however outcomes from the 90 day grain project could have been more encouraging. System-wide improvements still needed in some areas, i.e PBS.

Improve integration of road, rail and port networks

State Government

1/5 (Non-existent). Despite many promises the State Government has failed to develop and consult any State Freight and Ports Strategy that will be crucial in achieving this outcome.

Harmonise Customs laws

Commonwealth 1/5 (Non-existent). No action has been taken to harmonise Customs Regulations with Australian and International Standards.

Facilitate OSOM

State/NHVR 2/5 (Poor). South Australian OSOM permits are handled through DPTI much as they were in 2008 (although via an electronic system) – only interstate permits can be accessed through the NHVR. Significant problems occurred in the NHVR project (regulator creation) phase, causing setbacks. This area is crucial for the agriculture and expanding mining sectors in this state.

Ratings Key1= Non-existent. No change or improvement in 7 years2= Poor. minor improvement in some areas, but the core issue remains unaddressed.3= Some progress.4= Good. Major progress towards the core issues achieved, however minor issues remain.5= Issue removed from priorities list due to completion

Seven Years of Progress?Improve Planning Systems

State Government Commonwealth Government

2/5 (Poor). The State Government has only released as ‘Final’ the 30 year Planning Strategy and recently the Integrated Transport and Land Use Plan (ITULP) – other key plans have either expired (Infrastructure Strategy) or have been repeatedly promised but never delivered (SA Ports Strategy and SA Freight Strategy). 3/5 (Some progress). SAFC supports the introduction of Infrastructure Australia and the work it has done to date in developing national strategies, however it is now time to develop a guiding national transport and infrastructure strategy/plan incorporating all modes (the National Land Freight and National Ports Strategies are single mode and essentially only issues identification papers with very few solutions proposed).

Harmonised National Rail Regulations

State and Commonwealth Governments

3/5 (Some progress). Still some minor differences in some jurisdictions i.e. NSW. SA has been particularly good at agreeing to full national harmonisation and hosts the ONRSR. The failure of WA and Qld to join the scheme is reflected in the score.

Address Skills Shortages in the transport sector

State and Commonwealth Governments

2/5 (Poor). Little achieved – only the reduction in economic growth/exports post GFC has stopped this being a more major concern.

Streamline transport security requirements

Commonwealth Government

TBD

Priorities for Reform

• Sections Drafted to date:– Improve Planning and Strategy Development

• SA - Need the Infrastructure Plan updated and Freight/Port Strategies released.

• Implementation of ITLUP without further delay• Cwth – need to embrace a multimodal focus in future

planning efforts• Need to commit to an update schedule for all Govt.

strategies & plans (both Cwth and State)

Priorities for Reform

– Roadside Parking on Freight Routes• Speed surveys indicate the network is

straining – Average speeds on Main North Road in AM/PM peaks are 27kph (with the lowest speed section just 6kph)

• Principal freight routes need to be 24/7 clearways

• Govt papers suggest this should already be happening (A Functional Hierarchy For SA’s Land Transport Network) but this has failed to be practically applied.

Priorities for Reform

– Heavy Vehicle Charging (Tolls & Mass-Distance-Location• Tolls

– the benefits that accrue to the trucking industry must outweigh the cost of the toll

– Trucks should not subsidise capacity increases associated with motorists, cyclists and pedestrians

– Tolled roads must be excluded from the current changing regime (via fuel & rego) when seeking to recoup investment costs

• Mass-Distance-Location– The concept of ‘investment should follow the truck’ is laudable– Needs to be an ‘all or nothing’ change – a compromised MDL

system is unlikely to offer any improvements over the current system, with fuel charges as a proxy for mass and distance.

Priorities for Reform

– Facilitate High Productivity Vehicles• 5 sub sections:

– Gazettal below design capacity» Roads like NEXY – PBS3 capable – need to be gazetted at the

designed capacity. » The current situation on NEXY alone is a 25% reduction in

potential freight productivity & hundreds of extra trucks on the roads every year

– Performance Based Standards (PBS)» Need to merge the PBS and standard combination networks» Classification system (for acceptance under PBS) needs to

be simplified & made cheaper» DPTI should not be reviewing their own decisions on PBS

Priorities for Reform

– Facilitate High Productivity Vehicles (Continued)• 5 sub sections:

– HML» HML requirements include road friendly suspension and Mass

Management accreditation to protect pavements» Thus the only reason HML access should be denied is if there

is a specific weight limitation on the infrastructure (such as a bridge)

» HML and standard networks should be merged, with any weight issues to be dealt with via restrictions

– First/Last Mile» Funding pool required, and interventions prioritised

– OSOM» Timeframes for permits an issue

Priorities for Reform

– Interaction of Cyclists and other road users – The One Metre Rule

• SAFC supports improved road safety for all road users, including bikes – safety is a shared responsibility of road users

• However there are a litany of problems with the 1m rule, that make it difficult to apply/enforce and could result in unintended safety impacts

– lane widths on many roads can not cope with the extra width requirements, pushing traffic into each other

– May see more head on and side-to-side car/truck impacts– Over a page of further dot point issues with the new regulations

Priorities for Reform

– Accelerated depreciation for freight vehicles• Australia has an aged heavy vehicle fleet, and it is

getting older (ABS)• Would encourage the purchase of new Trucks and

Locos• Benefits: Safety and environmental

– Adelaide Airport Curfew• Notes the Commonwealth’s improvements to the list of

permitted aircraft in 2015• Call for an independent review with the intention of

improving operation.

Priorities for Reform

– Port and Rail Infrastructure and Development• Suggests a bias towards ‘common user’ facilities• Recommends merging the 2 rail and ports access regimes

into a single strategic supply chain access regime• ESCOSA have already indicated they view this suggestion

by SAFC in a favourable light, as has DPTI.

– Harmonise customs laws with Australian and international standards

• Need to link legislation with standards, to remove import issues. A previous issue that has not been addressed.

Possibilities – Looking forward

• Impacts of Technology, and affects on transport regulation in the future:– Electronic Work Diaries – both now, and looking to

the future– Driverless Cars, leading to driverless Freight

vehicles (trucks and trains) and the interactions with human driven vehicles

– Other possibilities?• Would there be value in a section like this?

Thankyou

• We are more than happy to hear feedback on the concepts outlined today

• you may raise an issue with the secretariat privately if you wish,

• Or speak up in the next session• Case Studies also appreciated