SENATE - Parliament of Australia filethree- to five-minute statement with no questions. If there are...

COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA

SENATE

RURAL AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS AND TRANSPORT REFERENCESCOMMITTEE

Reference: Continuing role of the Commonwealth in the Australian rail industry

BROKEN HILL

Thursday, 30 January 1997

OFFICIAL HANSARD REPORT

CANBERRA

SENATERURAL AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS AND TRANSPORT REFERENCES COMMITTEE

Members:

Senator Woodley (Chair)

Senator Crane Senator ConroySenator Calvert Senator ForemanSenator Bob Collins Senator Heffernan

Participating members

Senator Brown Senator FerrisSenator Brownhill Senator GibbsSenator Chapman Senator MargettsSenator Colston Senator MurphySenator Cook Senator TamblingSenator Eggleston Senator West

Matter referred for inquiry into and report on:

The basis for the recommendations contained in the Review of the Australian NationalRailways Commission and National Rail Corporation prepared by Mr John Brew and theoptions available to the Commonwealth Government for a continuing role in theAustralian rail industry.

WITNESSES

ASTILL, Mr Kevin Howard, President, Broken Hill Chamber of Commerce,235 Argent Street, Broken Hill, New South Wales 2800. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190

BLACK, Mr Peter, Mayor, Broken Hill City Council, PO Box 448, BrokenHill, New South Wales 2880 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167

BUTCHER, Mr Edward James, President, Barrier Industrial Council, Box 1,Trades Hall, Broken Hill, New South Wales 2880 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198

CONDON, Mr John Robert, Chairman, Operations Division—Far West NewSouth Wales, Public Transport Union, 333 Sussex Street, Sydney, NewSouth Wales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198

LEONARD, Mr Patrick Anthony, Committee Member, Far West Rail ActionGroup, Broken Hill City Council, PO Box 448, Broken Hill, New SouthWales 2880 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167

LONGFELLOW, Mr Raymond John, Councillor, Central Darling ShireCouncil, Reid Street, Wilcannia, New South Wales. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215

McGARRY, Mr Neil, Manager, Tourism and Economic Development, BrokenHill City Council, PO Box 448, Broken Hill, New South Wales 2880 . . . . 167

SENATE

RURAL AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS AND TRANSPORT REFERENCES COMMITTEE

Continuing role of the Commonwealth in the Australian rail industry

BROKEN HILL

Thursday, 30 January 1997

Present

Senator Woodley (Chair)

Senator Calvert Senator Ferris

Senator Bob Collins Senator West

The committee met at 9.03 a.m.

Senator Woodley took the chair.

165

RRA&T 166 SENATE—References Thursday, 30 January 1997

CHAIR —I declare this hearing of the rail inquiry open. At the end of the evidenceof the witnesses who have been invited, we will be opening up the forum to other people.However, we need to do that in a reasonably formal way. We will allow people to make athree- to five-minute statement with no questions. If there are people who want to make astatement at 12.30 p.m., will you please see the committee secretary.

On 7 November 1996 the Senate referred the following matters to the referencescommittee for inquiry and report by 6 March 1997: the basis for the recommendationscontained in the review of the Australian National Railways Commission and the NationalRail Corporation prepared by Mr John Brew and the options available to theCommonwealth government for a continuing role in the Australian rail industry.

Today the committee is holding its third public hearing on the reference. Thecommittee advertised for submissions in national and local newspapers and on the Internetprior to deciding on a program of hearings. Submissions received were published by thecommittee in Adelaide on Tuesday. It should be noted that the committee has authorisedthe recording, broadcasting and rebroadcasting of these proceedings in accordance with therules contained in the order of Senate 23 August 1990 concerning the broadcasting ofcommittee proceedings.

Before we commence taking evidence, let me place on record that all witnesses areprotected by parliamentary privilege with respect to submissions made to the committeeand evidence given before it. Parliamentary privilege means special rights and immunitiesattached to parliament or its members and others necessary for discharge of the functionsof the parliament without obstruction and without fear of prosecution. Any act by anyperson which operates to the disadvantage of a witness on account of evidence given byhim or her before the Senate or any committee of the Senate is treated as a breach ofprivilege.

RURAL AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS AND TRANSPORT

Thursday, 30 January 1997 SENATE—References RRA&T 167

BLACK, Mr Peter, Mayor, Broken Hill City Council, PO Box 448, Broken Hill, NewSouth Wales 2880

LEONARD, Mr Patrick Anthony, Committee Member, Far West Rail Action Group,Broken Hill City Council, PO Box 448, Broken Hill, New South Wales 2880

McGARRY, Mr Neil, Manager, Tourism and Economic Development, Broken HillCity Council, PO Box 448, Broken Hill, New South Wales 2880

CHAIR —Welcome, Councillor Peter Black, Mr Patrick Leonard and Mr NeilMcGarry. The committee prefers all evidence to be given in public but should you at anystage wish to give your evidence, part of your evidence or answers to specific questions inprivate, you may apply to do so and the committee will consider your request. We wouldbe happy if you would give a brief opening statement which outlines your views and thenwe will ask members of the committee to put questions to you.

Mr Black —Firstly, let me say that I am delighted that you and your committeehave chosen to hold this hearing in Broken Hill. We in Broken Hill too often feel left outof things and we deem it a privilege—the people of Broken Hill will support me in this—that you should choose to have one of the hearings associated with this matter held here inBroken Hill.

I will be brief. I will not address all of the matters in the submission that has beenpresented to your committee. They are documented. I just want to give some sort ofoverview of the worth of the Indian Pacific train currently to Broken Hill. I will not dealwith freight matters simply because I do not know enough about freight matters. One ofmy colleagues from the Far West Rail Action Group representing a subsection of that—theIRA, the Ivanhoe Rail Action Group—will speak to that. Mr Ray Longfellow will addressthis matter later on.

The train in the last full year that we can investigate, 1995-96, brought some27,000 tourists to Broken Hill. That is people that either got off the train at Broken Hill orbroke their journey in Broken Hill. Whilst it is very difficult to say precisely what atourist does spend—how many bed nights they do spend in Broken Hill and so on—weestimate that 27,000 tourists are to be worth $6.8 million, which equates to 80 full-timeequivalent jobs. Another interesting factor is that since the refurbishment of the train itspopularity certainly has increased. The increase for the year 1995-96 over the year 1994-95 was estimated to be some 17 per cent.

You would not be unaware—you have had a hearing in Port Augusta—of thefeelings of regional and rural Australia which have been expressed over the many years atboth state and federal level in terms of the traditional questions, ‘Why is it that the cityseems to get it?’ and ‘Why is it that the bush seems to miss out?’ There is a great deal ofpsychology attached to those particular statements. As a very simple example, could I say



that we in Broken Hill wonder why it is there is even an inquiry into the future of theIndian Pacific when there is no such inquiry into any of the suburban railways of thecapital cities of Australia, no inquiry into the future of trams in the capital cities and noinquiry into the future of ferries in the capital cities, all of which run at a loss. We have atrain which is said to run at a loss. It supplies a vital community service to people of thebush and yet that community service obligation is forgotten, when at the same time itwould most definitely appear that the community service obligations that attach tosuburban railways, trams and ferries and the like are never really questioned.

Mr Chairman, the history of our campaigns about rail in Broken Hill now go backseveral years. Of course, it must be said that Broken Hill has been very closely associatedwith the rail service for just over 100 years now and, particularly in those early years, theimportance of rail to Broken Hill, both from the mining point of view and from the peoplepoint of view, could not be understated.

There is a symbolism attached to rail. There is a symbolism attached to the varioustrains that operate on our railway line. When the Greiner government was elected to NewSouth Wales, one of the first acts that it generated was the announcement that the thentrain serving Broken Hill—the state train serving Broken Hill from Sydney—would ceaseits journeys. That was the Silver City Comet. I must say that in my experience of publiclife that I am always somewhat surprised about what gets people excited, what focuses theminds of communities and similar. Certainly, railways and particular trains do.

On the last trip of that train, in the first year of the Greiner government, we hadscenes at Ivanhoe—and I am sure that Ray Longfellow later on will mention this aswell—where citizens put four-wheel drives across the railway line. Normally law abidingcitizens put four-wheel drives across the railway line to, as it were, make a statement—aprotest—about the loss of the train. Similar scenes were enacted at Menindee. Here, inBroken Hill, there was a similar large protest at the railway station. The facts of historyrecord that the then minister, Bruce Baird, would not receive deputations to discuss thematter.

The evolution of time saw the formation of FRAG, the Far West Rail ActionGroup, which initially encompassed the communities of Ivanhoe, Menindee and BrokenHill, and, subsequently, Condobolin. Strong support was generated for the return of thetrain through organisations such as the New South Wales Local Government Association,the New South Wales Shires Association, farmers groups and all sorts of interestedcommunity groups that had attachments in places in the west of New South Wales. It isalso a fact of history that the then Carr opposition promised to return that train to BrokenHill. I have got no doubt in my mind that that promise to return the train—a promisewhich has been honoured—was seminal in the last state election result, in so far as theseat of Broken Hill was concerned.

Shortly after the issue of the Silver City Comet, the people of Broken Hill, as did



the people of Port Pirie, Port Augusta, Whyalla and Mount Gambier, experienced a verysimilar type of exercise. That exercise related to the Budd cars that were then operated inSouth Australia. We have, as it were, at this time managed to gain the return of the railservice from Sydney to Broken Hill, albeit only once a week. The train arrives—runningduring the day I might add as opposed to the Indian Pacific running across the WesternPlains at night—on a Wednesday and returning on Thursday. The member for BrokenHill, who was present this morning, Mr Bill Beckroge might speak on this. It is myunderstanding that very deep consideration is being given to increasing the service fromonce per week to twice per week simply because of the patronage that the train hasattracted. I believe that is very significant.

When I mentioned earlier the question of community service obligation, could I saythat in that 27,000 I have not mentioned any local components. The local people do usethe train and they use the train for a variety of purposes. Pensioners use it. They can travelfrom here to Sydney, for example, for the princely sum of zero. I do not know why thetrain should be selling tickets for zero but, nevertheless, that is the fact of the situation. Asimilar situation, of course, pertains to Adelaide. I am unaware as to how many people doutilise the train, but I am aware that there is a significant component of our senior citizenswho do use the train for such services, particularly in Adelaide, for medical and relatedmatters. The train is infinitely preferable to our more elderly citizens to the alternativepublic transport which is private Greyhound coach or the plane. In many instances ourelderly people simply cannot get on the plane for various reasons; they find the coachuncomfortable, and the train is deemed to be a very satisfactory and convenientalternative. So there is that element which is important to broken health from the point ofview of quality of life.

The overriding factor, I believe, in this issue really was crystallised in the stateelection before last in Victoria when the then to be minister for transport in Victoriapushed the claim that Victoria would seek to have the train, the Indian Pacific, re-routedfrom Broken Hill to travel through Melbourne post the completion of the standard gaugeline link between Adelaide and Melbourne. As you might imagine, that announcementcreated a considerable furore within the community of Broken Hill and those othercommunities which rely so heavily on the train along the rail link between Broken Hilland Parkes.

It has been a matter of some considerable concern within the community. Quitevoluminous correspondence to and fro exists, and many rail interviews have beenconducted. Mr Williams from National Rail assured us it is not the intention of NationalRail—or whoever it is; it has had several name changes, as the committee will know—tore-route it through Melbourne but, nevertheless, there are still those in Victoria who areactually pursuing a re-routing of the train to proceed through Melbourne.

This situation is not ameliorated by the fact that National Rail has also, in itswisdom, re-routed some of the freight trains that used to run through Broken Hill. For



example, the steel that used to travel through Broken Hill is now being largely routedthrough Melbourne—Whyalla, Adelaide, Melbourne—and so on around the coast. We notethat the trains that formerly used the Broken Hill corridor for the purpose of bringing incars—in particular Elizabeth to Queensland—no longer come, yet we see Finemore, inparticular, transport on the road bringing cars through constantly. But those trains nolonger come.

We are alarmed about decisions wherein the only freight train, we are told, willoperate on the rail corridor post whatever year, and we would assume that that year isgetting closer and closer. The only train that is going to operate as a freight train will bethe fast freight operating between Brisbane and Perth. This is a serious situation simplybecause, with less trains operating on the route, obviously the cost per tonne or perpassenger that is being moved will naturally increase. This is a matter, I think, thatrequires some thought and deliberation. Certainly we have been given assurances by theNew South Wales state government that the rail corridor shall stay open but, in terms ofthe future cost, whether it be in this century or the next, that question mark is alwaysgoing to be there.

So there is a very real question mark in the minds of the people of Broken Hillabout the Melbourne route. That question mark, as I say, has also been enhanced in theminds of the people of Broken Hill by the public discussion which is now beingconducted over the question of privatisation. There is a considerable fear within the mindsof Broken Hill people—particularly after reading articles concerning a TNT road tollconsortium taking it over and upgrading it to Oriental Express standards and so on—thatthe train, if privatised, will answer only to shareholders and not to the people, and that aprivatised owner would reroute the train through Melbourne. Again, that is a concern fortwo reasons: the loss to the economy of Broken Hill and—forgive me, I am the mayor andso I have got to be somewhat parochial—and the loss to the citizens of Broken Hill andits larger district, to people who utilise the train for their access to capital cities forwhatever services are not available in Broken Hill.

Before I conclude, I make one earnest plea: in this whole saga that relates to theIndian Pacific, it would appear to me that the people of Broken Hill have never beengiven—with the clarify that is needed—a commitment that over a long period of yearsthere shall continue to be a minimum of two Indian Pacific services through Broken Hillper week. There have always been committees or statements, reviews, state governmentscompeting against each other, and the like; but we have never been able to gain anabsolute and firm commitment that over the years there shall be such a service. It isinteresting to note that your colleague, Senator Harradine, was able to get some moneysfor public transport to support or subsidise—call it what you will—public transport inTasmania out of the Telecom sale.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Three hundred bucks a ticket!



Mr Black —One really has to ask this question: why is it that suburban operationscan continue without the obvious question marks that are being asked about communityservice obligations on such trains as the Indian Pacific? They continue, the Tasmaniansituation continues, and the saga goes on. Here in Broken Hill the questions are asked, butthey never seemed to be bothered to be asked about services in Tasmania or services inthe capital cities.

Senator BOB COLLINS—A very reasonable question.

CHAIR —I do not know whether anyone is going to answer why. It would be avery political answer, I think.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Senator Calvert might like to comment on that later.

Senator CALVERT—It was not Senator Harradine who got that subsidy: I can tellyou that!

CHAIR —It is a very good question. Mr Leonard, I would ask if you could keepyour remarks down to a reasonable amount of time so that we have got time for questions.That would be useful, but certainly the time is yours.

Mr Leonard —I will not keep you long. I can guarantee you that. I have read theBrew report and, after reading what Mr Brew had said, I thought it was a personal attackagainst the former Labor government. It may be sour grapes because Mr Brew was aformer employee, the CEO, of State Rail; and then he was employed to give a reportregarding the privatisation of this line. I would say that, when he left his job, he was notdoing a very good job on State Rail anyway.

In his report he does not make any mention of the inquiry that was held in the late1980s regarding an east-west corridor. We were part of that. The conference was held inBroken Hill. One of the people on that delegation representing the politicians was the nowDeputy Prime Minister, Tim Fischer. I cannot remember the others, but it was held here.Mr Brew makes no mention of that. Recommendations came out of that conference to tryto upgrade the rail system across the east-west. At that particular time, all that happenedwas union bashing; and now they blame the Labor government. Take note that, during thattime, there was restructuring in the rail unions; they did their part. If these otherrecommendations were not carried out by management, you cannot very well blame theLabor Party for that, nor the unionists. Mr Brew does not make any mention of that: or, ifhe does, I would like to know what page it is on.

Also, he does not say much about management. Even at a conference in the late1980s or early 1990s, the then manager of AN made a statement that the marketing of theIP was not up to scratch. They said that it was not management. Just after that, the IndianPacific was refurbished. Since then it is on the up market. At the time that people made



those decisions, I do not think they were informed enough of what happened, but at leastthey did go across Australia in a train. They were not making decisions coming out ofplanes.

If privatisation does take place, it is going to be a great big problem for BrokenHill, and not only because of the loss of jobs. We know what loss of jobs is, and therewill probably be more. You get people from the government—I heard it last night—whowant to create employment. It is a bloody good way to create employment if you aregoing to get rid of people. I do not know where they are going to find the jobs for them.It is a big thing—but where? Please someone tell us. They always say they are going tocreate employment. Where in Broken Hill can they create it? Keeping the train on the railmight be one way.

It will be a problem for the tourism industry here if it is privatised and the trainsdo not come back through Broken Hill. Tourism is more or less taking over from themining industry. Mining has been going on here for over 100 years. There will always bemining in this area but not what it was in the 1950s and 1960s.

The citizens of Broken Hill have had a train service to Adelaide for nearly over100 years and, I believe, for the contribution that the people of Broken Hill have made tothe Australian governments, they are entitled to a train service. I have read and I haveheard people say that you can travel by bus or by plane. Pensioners do not get free bloodyplane tickets. And the elderly people find it hard to get up and down on buses. I do notknow if you people travel by bus, but some of those steps in the buses are quite steep, andthey are not very wide when you go to get through them either.

A lot of the people that use the train service from here to Adelaide have got backand leg problems. Also there are a lot of parents who like to take their children on a trainbecause they can get up and move around the train. There is nothing worse than having achild sitting in a bloody bus for six or seven hours and they cannot move. If you are aparent you will know that children like to move around. A lot of the elderly people like tomove around too. They cannot sit for long hours because of arthritis and things like that.

There are plenty of old people in Broken Hill, particularly old miners and not soold miners, that need a train service to go to Adelaide to seek repatriation help and also tosee specialists. If there is not going to be any train, how do they get there? They cannottravel by bus, they cannot drive a car—and not everyone owns a car anyway. So that ispart of the reason why we hope, and we ask you, that if it is privatised please make surethat the IP still comes through Broken Hill the same as always—twice a week.

Then you have got the returned servicemen. They go to Adelaide for therepatriation treatment and whatever. It was okay to send them around Australia during thewar in dogboxes, if you are old enough to remember that, but now you are going to take atrain service off them which they were entitled to. It does not say much for what they



have done for this country of Australia. It is a good way of saying, ‘Thanks, you’ve donea good job but now we don’t want to know you.’ That is a problem for them.

It is important for all elderly people that they maintain this rail service eventhough, as Peter said, you get a free rail pass. So what? They have been paying taxes andeverything over the years, and they are surely entitled to something. We often hear ourleaders say what a great place Australia is to live in and how lucky we are and how weshould expand out to the country areas. That amazes me.

They want you to go to country areas, and one of the easiest ways to get to thecountry and see things is by rail. Now it looks as though, if the privatisation takes place,there will be no rail service out here. It is no good telling people about Australia, and thentaking one of their main links away from them. As Peter said, we have a rail service nowonce a week and that was brought in by the Labor Party. Who says it is going to continueif they get beaten in the next elections?

Broken Hill is a very special place because of its unique mining conditions andwhat have you. There are many things to see in Broken Hill. But if we take the trainservice away the only way people will be able to come and look at Broken Hill and thearea and all the district will be by bus, car or plane. Yet we are part of Australia’sheritage—and we are bloody proud of it. Some of us are about the third or fourthgeneration of miners in this place. We are proud of Broken Hill and we believe that weneed something that the people over on the eastern seaboard are entitled to have.

I cannot see where there is any difference between city and country persons. Ibelieve everyone is equal. We pay our taxes, the same as they do over there. They areprepared to spend plenty of money upgrading Sydney—they have to, because of theOlympics—and then I read in the paper on Monday about how they are doing more workto Parliament House because there are too many people there. There is probably a goodway to fix that up, the same as they did to everyone else: start cutting. Nevertheless, thatis not in this role of privatisation of the IP.

Broken Hill has made a great contribution to Australia, with royalties and taxes,through wool, sheep and cattle. The government has always accepted this money—and itis not in thousands, it is in billions. It is now the government’s turn to say thank you tothe people of Broken Hill and make sure that, if it is privatised—and I hope it is not; itshould be run by the government—they continue to run the Indian Pacific through BrokenHill the same as it has been, that is, twice a week. That will enable people to travel bothways and also to have a rail service continue to Adelaide. It might not seem much topeople that live in the cities where they can jump on the train any day they like. But whenyou only have two services going back and forwards, people need it. And the people ofBroken Hill deserve it. It is okay to say that the cost to governments is very high, but wealso should take into consideration the amount of money that is sent out of Australia tohelp other countries. We are prepared to prop people up overseas. It is about time the



government started propping the people up in Broken Hill. Thanks very much.

CHAIR —Thank you.

Senator BOB COLLINS—I have a number of questions, but I will just ask one atthis stage and defer to my colleagues. Mr Leonard, you mentioned the Brew report andcommented on that. This question is either to you or Mayor Black. In consideration of thevery negative impact that the adoption of the recommendations of the Brew report wouldhave on this community, did Mr Brew visit Broken Hill in the preparation of that report,and did the council or any community organisations have an opportunity to be consultedand have some input into that report?

Mr Leonard —Not to my knowledge.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Not at all?

Mr Leonard —Not that I can recollect.

Mr Black —To the best of my knowledge there has been no consultation, nocontact whatsoever, with any organisation in Broken Hill. There are representatives ofPasminco here this morning. They obviously have a similar interest in the conduct of thetrain, the link between Broken Hill and Port Pirie. They may have been consulted but—

Senator BOB COLLINS—The council was not?

Mr Black —Certainly not.

Senator CALVERT—If I can start my questioning by making an observation,looking through the vast array of documents we have here I note a press release from theminister saying that the Indian Pacific services would be retained in the reform agenda.Also, for the benefit of the mayor, I can say that in Adelaide on Monday AN stated thatthey had never considered pulling the Indian Pacific out of Broken Hill. So those twocomments certainly should give you some reason to be optimistic. Being a person from aremote area in Tasmania, I can tell you that we have similar worries.

Mr Black —But you have got Senator Harradine.

Senator CALVERT—I note, Mayor, that you made a point that, in your memory,you have never had any commitment. Does that mean that, over the last 13-odd years, theLabor Party would not give any commitments? I would have thought they would havebeen well situated to do that.

Mr Black —There has been at no stage no long-term commitment. The best wehave had is, ‘for the foreseeable future’, or, ‘for several years’, or words to that effect. I



repeat, there has been an ongoing question mark—and I believe it has been principallygenerated in Victoria—with respect to re-routing the trains through Melbourne. I can quotepress releases as well that say that consideration has been given to re-routing the train. Iam quite sure that the files of the Broken Hill City Council would contain those pressreleases and we could get something to you.

But in the long term there has been no commitment. I do not think the mattershould be partisan, it should be bipartisan. When you suggest the Labor Party did not giveus a long-term undertaking, and I acknowledge the assistance in those years of SenatorCollins, we had one hell of a battle just to get that money to have the train refurbished.

Senator BOB COLLINS—That is right.

Mr Black —Under the Labor government we had representatives at that meeting inPerth to discuss whether the train would continue to run or not. That is only eight yearsago. It has been an issue which has not received the clarity of statement as to the futurethat it deserves.

Senator CALVERT—I had a rough briefing from the former minister on the planecoming up about the problems he had trying to get it through his cabinet to get assistance.

Senator BOB COLLINS—But the bottom line, Senator Calvert, with respect, isthat I got it. I have to say that Councillor Black was part of the delegation that camedown to Canberra to make those representations to get the money.

Senator CALVERT—All the evidence shows that government involvement in therunning of AN and the formation of National Rail, whichever government it has been, hasnot stopped the continual run of job losses. If AN is going to continue to run the railways,are we not going to get more of the same? That is the conclusion that theAdvertisercameto and that is the conclusion that the mayor of Port Augusta has come to. We are at thestage now where the managing director and the acting general manager of AN both saidthe time has arrived, that we are in a mess.

Mr Black —I am grateful that the mayor of Port Augusta generally stays in PortAugusta.

Senator BOB COLLINS—So are a lot of other people!

Senator CALVERT—When the negotiations were going on for the formation ofNational Rail, did you support the proposals by the then government to have a NationalRail system with private operators on the track competing against each other?

Mr Black —We did not, as a principle position, here in Broken Hill support thequestion of private operators. Again, if I can go to these figures which are in the Broken



Hill submission, the thing is that a private operator is simply not going to carry pensionersfor zero. The question will always be that the private operator will answer to shareholders,not to people. While we have a government operation we can expect more Senate hearingsand similar things. I wonder whether we would get the same with shareholders coming toBroken Hill to hear Broken Hill’s opinion about the operations of their train. It is assimple as that.

I am quite sure the committee has been addressed about the English system. Someof those operators are being subsidised 90 per cent under the heading of privatisation. TheEnglish experience has been a total disaster. Why should that not occur in Australia too? Iam not well versed in these matters. For example, the Broken Hill City Council belongs tothe organisation known as Rail 2000, so we get their journals. However, I am not wellversed in how a railway does operate and how it might operate. My only concern is toensure that the train, the Indian Pacific, continues to travel through Broken Hill. That is areasonable request to government.

Senator CALVERT—Have you had a look at the Rail 2000 submission to ourcommittee?

Mr Black —I read it before Christmas.

Senator CALVERT—Do you agree with it?

Mr Black —I am not quite sure whether the submission published in their circularis the same as what was presented to the committee, but I have read the one in thecircular.

Senator CALVERT—Basically, their submission supports the privatisation of AN.Even a former minister, in the paper this morning—and he has explained it fully toothers—said that the formation of National Rail to get a national rail system has meant thedemise of AN.

Mr Black —I note that you are not attacking my basic premise that theprivatisation of the Indian Pacific would lead to its loss to Broken Hill.

Senator CALVERT—I am not here to attack anything, I am here to listen.

Mr Black —No, but you have not mentioned that—and that was my basic premise.

Senator FERRIS—Give the man assurance.

Senator CALVERT—Yes.

Mr Black —I cannot accept, and the people of Broken Hill will not accept—from



bitter experience—that privatisation will result in the continuation of the two-a-weekservice through Broken Hill.

Senator CALVERT—There have been assurances given—for what they areworth—from the minister and from AN, that Broken Hill will be continued.

Mr Black —I agree: ‘for what they are worth’.

Senator CALVERT—You made the point that 27,000 tourists stop in Broken Hilland that is worth $6.8 million. Do they stay the week? I believe the Indian Pacific onlystops for about half an hour.

Mr Black —The director of our tourism is behind me, Senator Calvert. I do notknow whether he can be sworn in, but he has all those figures at his fingertips. I think theaverage bed night—and he will correct me if I am wrong—at the moment is 3.6 bednights. There are figures available from both the federal and the state tourismorganisations so far as tourism to Broken Hill is concerned. We know how many peopleget off the train as tourists. What is 27,000 people per annum worth? I do not think thatanybody has ever said that it is going to be worth so many dollars and cents.

Senator CALVERT—No, but I am really trying to find out how long they stay.

Mr Black —There is debate within the tourism operators of Broken Hill, but theaverage stay—as quoted to me—seems to be about 3.6 bed nights.

Senator CALVERT—The train only runs once a week, so they must—

Mr Black —No, no.Senator BOB COLLINS—Twice a week.

Mr Black —The Indian Pacific operates twice per week and I do note, so far as theSydney leg is concerned, that there are people travelling up or back because they cantravel during the daylight hours. There are those who want to go across the Western Plainsand see the kangaroos jumping about and all that sort of thing.

I might also mention that we are heavily promoting overseas the use of the trains—both of them—as a council, through our budget. Our straight cash donation as a council iswell over $300,000 to our tourist association. Mr Neil McGarry, behind me, is our touristofficer. He is, in the very near future, going to Berlin for the world tourism trade thing.We are trying to promote it. People can be attracted to the idea of catching a train acrossthe Western Plains and seeing the kangaroos jumping about and the emus running aboutand so on. The other thing is that they then go back on the Indian Pacific. So, essentially,you have got three services per week: one operated on the Sydney-Broken Hill leg; oneoperated by the state government; and two operated through the federal organisations—the



IP.

Senator CALVERT—You, obviously, are pinning a lot of faith in the tourismindustry to revitalise Broken Hill.

Mr Black —The figures are that 10 years ago there were 4,600 breadwinners onthe line of lode; today there are less than 700 producing the same amount of concentrate.

Senator CALVERT—As far as tourism goes, we may not agree, but wouldn’t youthink that private operators have a better show of making a dollar out of it thangovernment? Governments have not proved to be great tourist operators.

Mr Black —That is certainly the experience of the operators in Broken Hill. I donot question that. I do not believe that, for example, a council bus operation wouldefficaciously compete with the private sector. But, on the other hand—I come back to theissue of the train—I am more than convinced that if that train was privatised, we wouldlose it, in so far as the service to Broken Hill is concerned. The Melbourne option wouldbe the one they take, simply because of the profit motive.

Senator CALVERT—Have you got any idea of how many jobs have been lost inBroken Hill in the railways over the last 10 or 15 years?

Mr Black —Again, I cannot say definitively. Twenty-four in the last year or sohave gone or are about to go—that is from the State Rail sector. I do understand that MrRay Longfellow, representing the IRAG, will address job losses in the rail later on thismorning.

Senator WEST—Prior to the election, Mr Mayor, were you given any assurancesthat there would be no changes to the rail services to Broken Hill by the then shadowminister—the now minister? Were there any assurances that AN would stay as it is andyou would not be seeing it privatised?

Mr Black —There were no assurances given apart from the standard statementfrom AN that they saw their operations going in their marketing plan—the marketing planwas constantly quoted—for the next several years, but there was never a statement aboutthe long term.

Senator WEST—I understand that the train here is one of your major publictransport services. Is that correct?

Mr Black —It is not only a major component, but the figures which are available—and I believe some of them are in the submission that has been presented to the committeefrom the Broken Hill City Council—indicate a significant growth in numbers. I quoted the17 per cent from 1994-95 to 1995-96 in the IP. It is a growth area in visitations.



The majority of tourists to Broken Hill—in the submission we quote a figure of225,000 per annum who visit Broken Hill—come here by road. We have a very smallcomponent by air. We have a significant component by road and a small component byrail.

Senator WEST—You think there is no way that, with the privatisation of AN, youcould guarantee a service, or that anybody could guarantee a service to continue?

Mr Black —Experience overseas certainly has not led me to believe that. Again, Iwould say that if an operator is going to answer to shareholders and not to people, thenthe shareholders are going to say that they do not want to operate something at a loss. Thereason is as fundamental as that.

Senator WEST—I just want to make the comment that Adelaide did not think itwas going to lose the Grand Prix either, did it?

Mr Black —No.

Senator BOB COLLINS—For the benefit of the mayor, and for the people ofBroken Hill, I want to refer to this press report. I had not seen this press until yesterday, itis local Port Augusta press. It is in respect to Senator West’s question, and I am happy toprovide you with copies of this, the committee has got copies of it.

There was a very large rally in Port Augusta—I think something like 1,500people—in respect of the future of AN and the railway. Prior to that there was a visit byMr Sharp, and this got some air time yesterday in Port Augusta but it is equally relevantto Broken Hill. I will make sure you get copies of it. Mr Sharp, when he was shadowminister, visited Port Augusta and in respect of the future of AN, the mayor of PortAugusta said this, after the meeting with Mr Sharp:

He’s a rail man and he believes in opening up regional Australia.

Mr Sharp went on to say:

The Coalition is concerned that Australian National should have a viable future that not only ensuresits survival, but enables it to grow, bringing job opportunities to important rail centres such as thosein the Grey electorate.

He went on to say:

The Coalition is committed to the continued and growing strength of rail transport and of AustralianNational in particular.

That might be some use to people here.



In the rally that I just mentioned that 1,500 people attended in Port Augusta afterthe election of the coalition government—and this is important—when the question ofAN’s debt arose, and Councillor Black and I have some questions about the debt of AN,which seems to be the reason everyone is saying we have got to close it down, the rallywas addressed by Liberal MP, Ms Trish Worth. She was referred to as ‘representing thePrime Minister’ and the report reads:

Ms Worth, representing the Prime Minister, Mr Howard, said AN’s financial problems were a legacyof the previous Labor Government, but the Coalition would take responsibility for fixing them.

I think it is fair to say, and this was canvassed yesterday and agreed to by those whoorganised the rally and were there and heard her say it, that if she had seriously suggestedthat the way they were going to fix AN’s debt problems was by selling AN, she probablywould have been run out of town on a rail. The meaning that was given reasonably to hercomments was that the government would accept responsibility for the debt of AN and MrSharp gave a categorical guarantee that AN’s future under a coalition government wasabsolutely guaranteed.

The reason I raise that here is that I had not seen that press myself—and I have thebenefit of a national press clipping service—because they were local papers. I thought itmay be of some interest to people here at Broken Hill. Senator Calvert raised the questionof tourism and job losses in railways, which has been a feature of railways worldwideover the last 10 to 15 years with new technology and all the rest of it. I would imaginethat this community would see the loss of jobs in the railway and the closing downcompletely of a railway service as two completely separate issues. That is the first thing Iwould like you to comment on. Secondly—and perhaps there is someone here from thetourism side who could comment on this—while I was taking a walk around town lastnight and talking to people I was told that, over the last decade, there had been a very bigincrease in the importance of the tourism industry to Broken Hill in terms of employmentand so on and that tourism well and truly ranked as equal, if not greater, in importance toBroken Hill than mining. Could you comment on that?

Mr Black —I do not rate it as of greater importance than mining. I do say thatthere are more people in Broken Hill today in full-time jobs or significant part-time jobsin tourism than on the line of lode. I believe the last census indicates that we had, at thattime, 1,100 in employment in tourism here in Broken Hill and around 700 employed inmining. The difficulty—and here I tread in very difficult waters—is that tourism tends togenerate jobs for women and, as such, it does not replace the jobs on the line of lode. Iknow that Senator West is going to have my throat in a minute for saying this, but Ibelieve it is a fact.

Senator WEST—No, I am just thinking of the history of the town, that is all.

Senator BOB COLLINS—If that is a matter of fact, it is a matter of fact.



CHAIR —Keep going—I will restrain her!

Mr Black —The thing is that the stability of the community has been historicallypredicated on one breadwinner per family, and history has it that that breadwinner shouldbe the male on the line of lode. That has been enshrined by legislation over the years withrespect to employment in mines. It has not only been enshrined in so far as legislation isconcerned; it has been enshrined by commissioners when they recognised the onebreadwinner per family with respect to wages settled in so far as mines agreements areconcerned. With the tourism industry, it is a fact that there are many jobs in tourismgenerated for women that simply have not been available historically on the line of lode.So within Broken Hill there are numbers of instances of two-income families in tourism.There are not that many two-income families on the line of lode.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Is the point you making that the increase inemployment has not necessarily led to an increase of population in the town?

Mr Black —No, the population of the town has stabilised. In the last municipalelections there was a slight growth in the electoral roll, of 148, over the four-year period. Iam not saying that that represents a significant increase in the population, because I do notbelieve it does. But I certainly do believe—and all the evidence is there—that thepopulation of Broken Hill has stabilised. According to the census, Broken Hill has lost4,620 citizens since I was first elected as mayor. That is the bottom line.

Senator BOB COLLINS—But it is a fact that, whatever the reasons for it, thetourism industry generally is a significant employer?

Mr Black —The initial shock was the Justice Fisher decision in 1986 in a matterrelating to the then mines agreement. I repeat, there were 4,600 being employed then onthe line of lode; today, I believe there are less than 700—or whatever the current precisefigure is. There has been a huge loss. The community of Broken Hill, however, isrenowned for its resilience. Part of that is its visionary nature. It has had a history ofuncertain times and uncertain futures, but the culture of the community is: grit your teeth,hang on, and we will do something. In this case, we have done something to reallygenerate tourism.

We started a long way behind the eight ball in terms of the steps taken bycommunities such as Alice Springs, but I would argue that Broken Hill is now one of thefeature visitation points in New South Wales. We have an incredible interest in New SouthWales and, in particular, we have had an enormous growth here in visitation fromVictoria. Victorian visitation 10 years ago for tourists was significantly low.

Senator BOB COLLINS—And that growth is increasing?

Mr Black —And now we have, as we call them, the feral yuppies driving their



Toorak tractors through Broken Hill in streams.

Senator BOB COLLINS—And the last part of that question was basically whetherthe situation at the moment is that that tourism growth is continuing to escalate in BrokenHill.

Mr Black —Yes. The growth in tourism is the single greatest component of thestabilisation of the population in Broken Hill. There is no question about that.

Senator FERRIS—I just make the point that, during a visit to Broken Hill lastweek as a tourist, most of the people that I encountered as I walked around the town ontourist activities were men, so I think you might be pleasantly surprised at the number ofmen who are working in the tourist industry.

It is the question of the tourist industry I would like to pursue. I am justwondering, Mr Chairman, if it is going to be possible for Councillor Black to get anyinformation from his tourist adviser if he is not able to answer my questions? Is it possiblefor him to refer to that tourist adviser?

CHAIR —We are happy to have him at the table. This is obviously critical to ourinquiry.

Senator FERRIS—Thank you. Of the figure in your submission of 27,000 visitorsto Broken Hill, how many came on the Indian Pacific and how many came on Countrylinktrains? How many came via the XPT through Dubbo? Are those figures broken down? Did27,000 people come here—

Mr McGarry —The figures relate to the period 1995-96. As a result of that, thenew rail services provided by Countrylink would have only had a minimal impact becauseof the actual starting time of those rail services. We keep separate figures in relation tobus transport, so the people coming on the Laser would identify that in the survey asbeing bus transport. The growth, I believe, is primarily in relation to the Indian Pacificand seems to be reflected in their own increases in passenger numbers over thecorresponding period.

The major marked increase we had in the use of trains by tourists visiting BrokenHill commenced when the second IP service was commenced in about 1993 or 1994. Oncethat second train was on the track it really improved our passenger performance out of thatarea.

Senator FERRIS—On the 3.6 nights, I think it was, Councillor Black, that yousaid people were spending here, is that an overall figure or are they the 27,000 people?

Mr Black —That is an average figure that has been cited for Broken Hill. That 3.6



is over the lot.

Mr McGarry —There are variations in the tourism industry. In the hot weatherpeople come out here for a shorter period of time than they do in the winter months. Mostof our rail passengers are, however, out here on package tours. You have to understandthat we have very well-developed half-day and day tour operations within Broken Hill andextended tours.

People coming off the Indian Pacific from Sydney will come into the tourist andtravellers centre and will book three days worth of half-day and day tours. For themajority of tours operated by our 4WD operators to get people out into areas such asWhite Cliffs and Tibooburra, the duration is not less than three days. So I think it is apretty fair assumption to say that the majority of those passengers are staying that long.

Senator FERRIS—And they are presumably passengers from Sydney who havecome up here?

Mr McGarry —The actual breakdown is that something like 24 per cent of ouroverall New South Wales based market arrives in Broken Hill by the Indian Pacific or bytrain services. Because of the community service obligations, a lot of those passengers arebased as far afield as Murwillumbah on the north coast of New South Wales and, indeed,throughout the entire New South Wales rail network.

In relation to our tourists from South Australia, about 14 per cent of all our visitorsfrom South Australia use rail.

Senator FERRIS—Would they come up through Port Augusta?

Mr McGarry —No, they would come directly from Adelaide.

Senator FERRIS—Okay. I am interested, Councillor Black, in a comment thatwas made by the Prime Minister last year. I believe it was on 5 January where hementioned the establishment of the national interstate rail network with access given toprivate operators. He said private operators would be running on the public rail grid alongwith AN and that the union movement supported this move to improve rail efficiency. Didyou support that statement by the Prime Minister or did you make any public commentabout that?

Mr Black —I would repeat the position. The historic position of Broken Hill hasbeen—and I have supported it both publicly and privately—that privatisation would leadto the re-routing of the train in so far as Broken Hill on the rail corridor and thecommunity it services between Broken Hill and Parkes.

Senator FERRIS—You must be a hard man to convince.



Mr Black —I come back again to the point that I made that Senator Calvertquestioned me on. There has never been a long-term guarantee. There has never been aguarantee along the lines that in five or 10 years time the train will be operating throughBroken Hill. That guarantee has never been made.

Senator FERRIS—It is pretty difficult to get guarantees on many things 10 yearsout.

Mr Black —Yes, I agree, but we never seem to have any trouble about it. Weknow the road is going to be there. The rail, who knows?

Senator FERRIS—Sure. Can I ask you whether you, or perhaps Mr McGarry,given that he is travelling to Berlin, have ever travelled on any privately owned touristtrains. Have any of you travelled on any privately owned tourist trains?

Mr McGarry —Puffing Billy.

Senator FERRIS—I have travelled on Puffing Billy myself. I found it a reallyenjoyable experience. I am wondering—

Mr Black —Silverton Tramway Company has a wonderful history here in BrokenHill. It was privately owned and still is.

Senator FERRIS—So, neither of you have taken the opportunity to travel on anyof these newly privatised trains overseas?

Mr McGarry —No, I certainly have not at this time. In a survey conducted by ANin 1989, 98 per cent of their passengers were holiday-makers. If you look at some workthat was undertaken by Frank Small and Associates into the likely growth of passengerservices on long-haul destinations there was a belief that by the year 2000, given therefurbishment of a train into a very smart train, the international visitation or utilisation ofthat train would not exceed greater than 19 per cent of its overall occupancy. You havegot to look at the way that tourism is developing in Australia and recognise the fact thatthe majority of the tourists that we are generating at the moment are coming out of south-east Asia and they do not have a propensity to use rail. UK, Europe and North Americawhich are important international tourist markets for Australia are growing at a muchslower pace and, frankly, the future of train services such as the Indian Pacific willcontinue to rely heavily on the domestic market.

Senator BOB COLLINS—That is a fact.

Mr Black —I have travelled on the Shinhansen in Japan. The suburban routes arewell done and the bullet train is very prestigious. I seem to remember something about thefare—it was fairly steep.



Mr McGarry —The other observation, Mr Chairman, in relation to a lot of thetrain services that are mooted as being of international standards that we should be lookingat—something like the Shinhansen, for instance—is that it carried 57 million passengerson the east Shinhansen route.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Precisely.

Mr McGarry —Amtrak, on a similar route to what we are talking about inAustralia where there was 1.1 million interstate passenger trips, carried 22 millionpassengers.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Ten times the volume.

Mr McGarry —We have to be a bit realistic. The Shinkansen can only makemoney and be a profit to private companies by the price regulation of the aviation servicesin Japan. So if a direct subsidy is not going to be provided, there will be, in some form oranother, an indirect subsidy provided to a private operator. The Canadian railways, forexample, operate in an integrated fashion. The New Zealand railways operate in anintegrated fashion where the money that is generated out of freight is utilised to cross-subsidise their rail services in passenger transport. Our most successful domestic railnetworks, such as Queensland Rail, do exactly that. The monumental money they aremaking out of coal is used to subsidise their great passenger services.

Senator FERRIS—Can I just make this last observation. Given that the previousminister is quoted in the paper this morning as saying that AN was doomed the day thatNR was formed, the former Prime Minister’s comment about competition and your own—

Senator BOB COLLINS—Who said that?

Senator FERRIS—You are quoted, Senator Collins.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Incorrectly, in that case, as theHansardrecord willshow. That is nonsense.

Senator FERRIS—You must have had 13 quite disappointing years as you havemaintained the position that the government should continue to own railways. The numberof people employed in the railways in this town has continued to decline and familieshave lost their jobs. Whilst tourism has grown, there is clearly no future for growth inpermanent jobs in this town if government continues to own the railways.

Mr Black —Can I just say to that that, if we go back 13 years, there were only twoemployees in Broken Hill who were employed by the federal government, whether it wasby Australian National or whatever the organisation was called in those days. The railemployees in Broken Hill were employed by the state. The interface is some 100 yards to



the west of our railway station where the changeover of authority, in those days before theagreement to single operation came in, took place. The significant losses in rail jobsoccurred at the state level and principally occurred in the days when Mr Greiner was thepremier and in the early years of Mr Fahey.

Senator FERRIS—That is my point: governments do not maintain jobs inrailways.

Senator WEST—It was the conservatives—Greiner was a Liberal.

Senator FERRIS—Mr Chairman, can I hear the answer to the question, please?

Mr Black —The losses did occur under the Greiner and Fahey governments. Theywere state government losses. I am aware that Mr Longfellow will address the absolutedecimation of Ivanhoe that has taken place; it is a tragic situation. But one has to facerealities. We could not understand as a community why, for example, everybody on the IPhad to be woken up then at 3 o’clock in the morning with a great thump on the train andwhy the power van—federal—was taken off and a New South Wales power van was puton. After some campaigning we got an agreement that the power van from Adelaide couldstay on the train as long as it was returned forthwith on the next train from Sydney. Wehave had these stupidities.

One of the classic stupidities was on the question of costs, which you questionedearlier on. Mr Leonard and myself were present at a meeting in Adelaide, chaired by thethen premier John Bannon, at Parliament House. The subject of budd cars was mentioned.When you talk about job losses and so on, the loss of the budd car service to Broken Hillwas a significant loss to Broken Hill, and I am sure you have heard the story of MtGambier and the rest of the iron train. I honestly thought I was living inYes, Ministerwhen, on the question of operation and cost of the budd cars, a portion of the concretingof the line west to Broken Hill was apportioned to the operation of the budd car service: itshall pay a proportion of the cost of putting concrete sleepers in instead of woodensleepers. That made the operation of the train too expensive, therefore the train had to becut out, and that meant that the train did not contribute anything to the cost of the sleepersin the first place. So I am not quite sure of that logic at all. That is what happened.

CHAIR —I am trying to wind up in about five minutes.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Have a nice try! Mr McGarry, I was interested in whatthe mayor had to say earlier about the increase in patronage since the refurbishment of theIndian Pacific. As I said before, the mayor was part of the delegation—it was quite awhile ago—to me when I was transport minister and he made representations to me onthat subject. I had not appreciated that. I just would not mind a bit more information aboutit. Is it correct that patronage has increased significantly since that refurbishment wascarried out and the standard of the coaches was improved?



Mr McGarry —The short answer to that is yes. Certainly, most of our evidence inrelation to customer satisfaction would be anecdotal but prior to the refurbishment of thetrain it was not uncommon for there to be complaints about the train. That has basicallyceased.

Senator BOB COLLINS—My last question is related to something that the mayorraised. I am sure that you, as someone who is directly involved in promoting tourism forthis region, would be in the same position as I would be, as someone who comes fromregional Australia, that you would not begrudge for one minute the benefits, and I thinkthey have been measurably very significant, to the tourist operators and the economy ofTasmania from the extraordinary subsidy that operates in respect of a direct governmenttaxpayer payment of about $300 per return ticket for people travelling across Bass Strait.

In respect of fairness and equity the fact is that we all live in this wide, brown landand some of us choose not to live in Sydney and Melbourne. The answer is always given,‘You can always drive to Broken Hill or Darwin.’ The fact is it costs a poultice to get toeither of those destinations from Sydney or Melbourne which is where the majority ofthese tourists come from. I would imagine, Mr McGarry and Mr Black, that thiscommunity would like an equal benefit in whatever form it is given, either as a subsidy tothe rail services or direct on people’s tickets of $300 of public money per ticket for peopleto come to Broken Hill.

Mr McGarry —We would probably be as much an island as Tasmania in somerespects. The facts of the matter also are that we do not have access to transportation inexcess of 34 seats in relation to our air travel. The only way we can compete in terms ofmass tourism, if you like, or group tourism is either with coaches or rail. Certainly, for themajority of people who are what we call FITs, free and independent travellers, thencoming out here the only option really is the train.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Thank you. Might I say not just on my own behalf butI am sure on behalf of the rest of the committee that as far as I am concerned theevidence that we have taken this morning has already made the trip to Broken Hillworthwhile. The reason I wanted to make that comment was just to indicate that it maywell be that the committee, Mr Black, may wish to seek further information in terms offactual information from either yourself or the tourist body here in Broken Hill in theformulation of our report. If we do that I am sure you would be happy to provide us—

Mr Black —We would be eagerly prepared to comply with any requests that youmight make.

Senator WEST—I always think trips to Broken Hill are worthwhile at any time ofthe year. I just went looking for my airline ticket that I used to get here and will use toget out and I cannot find it. I was looking for the cost. Maybe you can take this on notice.I am interested in a cost comparison of rail, air and bus and also some of the times that



they are operating. You can take that on notice. I know that with the XPT service out ofDubbo which connects with a coach from here, I have never heard anything butcomplaints from people who have had to take the coach, they much prefer the train.

Mr Black —The service has never been popular in Broken Hill from the point ofview of the local residents that are not—

Senator WEST—It is at a fairly crazy hour, isn’t it?

Mr Black —It leaves at three o’ clock in the morning. That is not a very good timeto leave in the first place. It is said to be uncomfortable, as any bus travel is to many. It isslow. It is limited to 100 kilometres per hour, whereas these roads are, of course, 110kilometres an hour officially. It is just not a popular thing to the ordinary person ofBroken Hill at all.

In so far as cost is concerned, the figures for the IP charges are in the submission.The return airfare that I have been charged to Sydney by Hazelton Airlines is $708. Thatprecludes any significant growth in tourism by Hazelton Airlines. I have to also say,however, that Hazelton offers a mix of fares. There have been occasions when I do not getthe tickets for myself, but I have seen the value on tickets and sometimes it has been $448or something.

This year I will be going to Sydney for meetings once a month and the airfarestructure is a frightening impost but, in so far as the charges on the IP and similarconcerns go, the Indian Pacific for me would cost $189 return, and if I wanted to go bybus it would be $180, which is a lot less than the $708 which I have cited for Hazelton.

Senator CALVERT—I just want to defend my state of Tasmania. I make noapologies for lobbying the government about having a subsidy.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Senator Calvert, I do not begrudge you a cent, wewould just like some of the action too.

Senator CALVERT—If we are talking about subsidies, I think New South Waleshas, for instance, a very generous concession for pensioners and children and all the restof it. That is the same thing as a subsidy. I just make the point to the Mayor that myinterest in Broken Hill is very similar to Tasmania. We have similarities: we both relyvery heavily on Pasminco for jobs; we have the tyranny of distance; we are relying moreon tourism than mining; and we need rail to keep trucks off the road for the benefit of ourpeople.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Tyranny of distance in Tasmania—you can spit fromone side of the place to the other!



Senator CALVERT—So I am very sympathetic to your concerns here and Irepeat: the commitments were made by the minister and by AN that IP will continue tocome through here.

Mr Black —We do not have Senator Harradine, with respect.

Senator CALVERT—You have Senator West and others.

Mr Black —But the son of a Broken Hill miner wrote the most recent book aboutBroken Hill and he was the Liberal Party member for Denison.

Senator CALVERT—At the present time?

Mr Black —He was the Liberal Party member for Denison. He is the son of aBroken Hill miner.

CHAIR —This debate will continue in the Senate, I presume. We need to wind up.The whole committee thanks you for the evidence you have given us. You may want tomake a supplementary submission. I think having those figures on paper would be handyand we would welcome that.

Mr Black —I should be able to cross-reference the figures to the train, so it willprovide pretty accurate data.

CHAIR —Thank you for appearing.



[10.20 a.m.]

ASTILL, Mr Kevin Howard, President, Broken Hill Chamber of Commerce, 235Argent Street, Broken Hill, New South Wales 2800

CHAIR —Welcome. Do you have anything to add to the capacity in which you areappearing?

Mr Astill —I will give you a little bit of background on myself as I have had 15 or16 years with the Chamber of Commerce and a long history with the tourist association onand off over as many years. I am currently the centre manager of a DEETYA enterprisedevelopment centre for small business development. I currently sit on the executive of thetourist association and have some involvement with the motels association in my owntime, based on the fact that my family operates a motel, and has done since 1972, inBroken Hill. I have been asked to join the Line of Lode Commercial Committee, whichwill be up and running shortly in that tourist area.

CHAIR —But today you represent the Broken Hill Chamber of Commerce.

Mr Astill —That is correct.

CHAIR —We would be happy to have an opening statement from you and then wewill move on to questions.

Mr Astill —I will read from what was prepared by the executive of the chamber.That is what you have there.

CHAIR —I am conscious of time. We will read that, and you can comment on it.

Mr Astill —I can make comments from that if you like. We have heard in depthfrom the mayor in relation to a lot of the areas in the overview. The main thing is that therail link clearly is a vital link for Broken Hill, and has been over many years. Assumingthat the government does take over AN’s debt, the chamber can see no reason to privatisethe organisation.

If the sale of AN proceeds, the Broken Hill Chamber of Commerce asks thatconsideration be given to three items: the continuation of the use of the rail corridorbetween Sydney and Broken Hill and then onto Adelaide and Perth for freight movement;the continuation of the present level of passenger service using the line; and thecontinuation of the current community service obligations by the government.

That really is the crux of it. The rest of it is written there. Clearly, the role that railhas played and continues to play in relation to some services, especially for Pasminco andBoral Gas, is in the transportation of goods both in and out of Broken Hill. The facts and



figures have just been given in relation to tourism. The Chamber of Commerce is veryclear in its thoughts and visions, and we have a vision statement into 2000 for the trainingof people in the tourism industry. That is what we see as the lifeblood of Broken Hill inthe future. The requirement for that rail service on an ongoing basis, given our location, isan integral part of that for Broken Hill to be a tourist destination.

Senator CALVERT—In your submission you say:

The privatisation of freight services would lead to the greater use of the rail between Sydney,Melbourne and Adelaide thus decreasing the use of the Broken Hill rail corridor.

Have you got any evidence that the committee could have on that? It would be useful toour inquiry if we did have some evidence.

Mr Astill —I could take that on notice. As I said, this was prepared by theorganisation, and as it is in there, I dare say we have information to back that up. I ammore than happy to ensure that we get that. For myself, with what you read in the media,the direction that would be taken in that sense to go down through Melbourne is aconcern, especially the continued use of the roads through this area. The decline of thoseroads over the last 10 years is a concern on a safety basis. We believe that the rail needsto continue through this area.

There is a lot of development going into the Menindee area and there is arequirement for the use of rail out of that area, both out of the horticulture from TandouLtd and the other developments in that area, with an expectation of an increase of 300jobs in that area.

Senator CALVERT—You comment that many of the passengers using the rail dosave by way of subsidised fares. I presume you mean pensioners and the rest.

Mr Astill —That is correct.

Senator CALVERT—Have you got any idea of just how many people who usethe Indian Pacific into here are actually full paying passengers and how many aresubsidised passengers? Is there any information available on that?

Mr Astill —I do not personally have that information. I am quite sure it isavailable through the council. What is clearly in my mind is that over the years—and Ispent 19 years operating a family motel—the opportunity to bring package holidays in hasbeen there. We ran and continue to run package holidays out of Sydney utilising thatpassenger rail with the utilisation of the pensioner subsidy. They are seven-day packagestying in with Silvercity Travel. It is a major component of our customer mix to make surethat we have sufficient business to operate.



Senator CALVERT—No doubt, because you can offer these packages—I know itworks this way in my state when using airfares—if you have got enough packages going,you can negotiate cheaper air fares or cheaper rail fares. Are you able to access cheaperrail fares through your packages for paying passengers?

Mr Astill —For the current packages, not so much. We put in a price as a motelsassociation to a local carrier, and they are packaged up through various rail centres. Onceagain, I am a little bit out of that area since going to the EBC.

Senator CALVERT—What would it cost for a full paying passenger from Sydneyto Broken Hill return, for instance?

Mr Astill —I am sorry; I do not have that information, just off the top of my head.

Senator CALVERT—Would it be a couple of hundred bucks or more?

Mr Astill —I do not have that information.

Senator CALVERT—You might take that on notice and you can provide thatalong with the information, if you can get it, about the Broken Hill rail corridor. You saidyou would get some information on it. In your summary you made the point that, sincethe federal government has said it will absorb the debt of AN and that is going to happen,you can see no reason to privatise the organisation. But the sort of evidence we got fromAN et cetera is that, even if that is absorbed, they are still not going to run at a profit;they are still going to lose money. Aren’t we not going to see more of the same? Quitefrankly, I think everybody on the committee agrees that National Rail and AN seem, withthe way things are at the moment, to be fighting each other; and there are going to be nowinners and everybody is going to be the loser, including the people. Something has gotto happen to break this nexus. Continuing the way it is, with the current managementpractice of AN—

Mr Astill —I really wonder whether current management practices by thegovernment should be assessed: perhaps a manager should be got in who could run it. Ifthe government believes that the private sector can run it, why shouldn’t the governmentfellow run it?

Senator CALVERT—To give you an example, yesterday we were shocked to findthat they had chopped the Port Augusta workshops into four different business operationsand that all the managers now live and work in Adelaide and very rarely visit theworkshops. That is just incredible. If that sort of practice is going to continue under AN,we are going to run into more trouble. Something has got to happen and, hopefully, thiscommittee will come up with some recommendations.

Mr Astill —I make my point again that, if the government believes the private



sector can do it, I do not see why the government should not be able to do it also. Thereason that we would like to see that is the continued maintenance of the communityrequirement to offer us a rail service, given our location.

Senator CALVERT—I gave you an example of what is the current practice.

Mr Astill —I can’t understand that.

Senator CALVERT—I am sure private enterprise would not run it like that.

Mr Astill —That is right, and that is why I say I cannot see why the governmentcannot run it correctly. Our family ran a taxi company for 10 years and we used to carryrail employees 300 and 400 kilometres on a normal taxi fare, because they were notallowed to stay on the train. There are ludicrous things in place that need to change tomake the railway more profitable.

Senator CALVERT—But the history so far of governments running it—whicheversort they are—has not been what you would call very good, has it?

Mr Astill —Maybe the government should review that, but I still cannot see whythey cannot run it.

CHAIR —That is obviously a debate that will continue.

Senator WEST—The mayor was asked whether there was any consultation withthe council in relation to the Brew report. I will repeat the question to you: was there anyconsultation that you are aware of with the chamber of commerce in relation to the Brewreport, or did it just appear out of the blue?

Mr Astill —When that comment was made, it actually made me think about it abit, and I do not have any recollection of that. I have only been back in as president thisyear but, to my knowledge—and I had been on the Executive at that time—we had noinput whatsoever.

Senator WEST—You called for the greater use of this corridor for freight, andyou talked about the increasing number of trucks that you are seeing. Are you aware of areduction in the use of this corridor as a freight corridor for rail?

Mr Astill —There is no doubt. The business that I currently run operates in the oldregional freight rail centre. We have a building there which is now utilised for businessdevelopment but which, prior to this, was a freight centre which closed, I believe, in 1992.The continuation in the decline in the amount of freight coming through and utilised byBroken Hill, which clearly is on a competitive basis, and the continuation of the use of theroad, is deteriorating the road substantially.



Senator WEST—So you are seeing an increase in the number of semitrailers anda decrease in the standard of the road because it has been—

Mr Astill —Without doubt. I have travelled extensively throughout New SouthWales and South Australia, through a personal hobby of mine, and I have visited everycapital city for the last 10 years. I have seen a major decline in the rural roads that I travelon and the increase in the amount of trucks travelling on those roads, with an empty railsystem operating. I believe the use of that would offer, firstly, a better service but,secondly, the ability for those roads to be able to continue to operate. Otherwise thedecline is quite unbelievable, really.

Senator WEST—How many freight trains a day operate out of, or through,Broken Hill?

Mr Astill —I am sorry, I would not have that information.

Senator WEST—Pasminco and Boral are big users?

Mr Astill —All the Boral bulk gas supply, to my understanding, comes through byrail. They are actually on the rail siding. I do not have the information from Pasminco, butclearly, from the use of rail for their concentrates to Pirie, and also from what we seeoperating through the back of where my work is, they seem to be the main users.

Senator WEST—For the committee’s benefit, would you like to explain where—Irealise you are not speaking on behalf of Pasminco—the processing of the metals takesplace between here and down to Port Pirie.

Mr Astill —I have a very basic knowledge of that from living here. There arepeople from Pasminco here who may be able to help if I am incorrect. The ore is minedand milled here and sent as a concentrate down to Port Pirie. It uses the rail link to dothat. To my knowledge that has always been the case and it continues to operate that wayas a major part of their operation to get that ore down to the Port Pirie smelters.

Senator WEST—That is the information I wanted on the record so that peoplecould understand what the situation was. We are not just talking one or two semitrailertype loads.

Mr Astill —Yes, they are very large trains.

Senator WEST—Significant trains. In one of your recommendations, in summaryand in the beginning, you say there is a continuation of current community obligations. Doyou have any idea what level that needs to be?

Mr Astill —I think to look at Broken Hill and the situation we are in, in relation to



the decline of the mining industry, that that tourist industry is so important. We have seen,with the loss of rail services, the ability to package holidays in. The value of packaging isclearly in relation to using all the facilities within the area. The local tour operators andthe tourist attractions really are more inclined to be highly utilised by package holidays.

We believe the requirement for that train, from the community side of it, is the factthat we do not expect it to necessarily make a profit, but we cannot afford to be payingtoo high rates that do not allow us to operate the tourist attractions and the packages thatwe have without some sort of support from the government. Broken Hill, traditionally, hasbeen a supporter financially of the mining industry for many, many years and as we gothrough this transition we are going to need to continue to support Broken Hill, at least atthe size it is and, hopefully, for some growth.

Senator WEST—Thank you.

Senator FERRIS—Your submission makes a very similar comment to thesubmission of Councillor Black, the previous witness. They are very similar but I willquote from yours:

The Broken Hill Chamber of Commerce believes that since the federal government has said it willabsorb the debt of AN it can see no reason to privatise the organisation.

Are we to gather from that that you believe that the government should continue to absorbthat debt?

Mr Astill —No. What I am saying is that if they absorb the debt now, I cannot seewhy they cannot operate the railways. If the government believes that if they absorb thedebt and give a debt-free organisation to private enterprise, then if they can operate it Icannot see why the government cannot operate it.

Senator FERRIS—Very clearly, the history of the government operating it is oneof continuing, increasing debt and continuing loss of jobs.

Mr Astill —I think any industry you look at has a continuous loss of jobs. I haveno doubt that whoever runs the railway needs to assess very seriously the labour practicesand the way that organisation has operated, as being one of their contributing costs to notrunning effectively. Regardless of whether the government or private enterprise runs it,unless they change quite a lot of the labour practices it will never run at a profit.

I have been witness to that through my own business. When we ran half of the taxiindustry in Broken Hill, the amount of work and the amount of cost to the railways, totake people on and off the trains because they had a set requirement, they could no longerstay on the train even though they could be a passenger, and we had a $400 fare so thatthey could not stay on the train, and that is ludicrous.



Senator FERRIS—Very clearly, you would not want the government operating ataxi industry, would you?

Mr Astill —Correct. But what I am saying is that the actual rail industry is anintegral part of industry, whether it be tourism, horticulture or mining. In some cases Ibelieve there needs to be that community support. With privatisation, if we go on to auser-pays system, we will not have a rail tourist component because the cost will go tosuch an extent.

I believe that the government can run the railways on a far more cost-effectivebasis and still be able to offer some subsidies to the areas that need it—that is, BrokenHill in our case and, as I have heard today, Tasmania. Whatever those needs are, it isclear that at the end of this, if the government continues to operate, it could be run farmore cost effectively than it has in the past if they seriously assess the practices and theway that the business is operated.

Senator FERRIS—There is no history in railways of the government being able todo that. I draw to your attention another submission item in your submission—and inCouncillor Black’s submission—in which you say:

If the sale of AN proceeds the Broken Hill Chamber of Commerce is of the view that it beconditional on:

You have got three points and he has got two, but they are similar. You mention:

. The continued use of the rail corridor through Broken Hill for freight movement.

I think we have got an assurance from Minister Sharp that that will take place. Also, thereis no evidence to suggest that there is going to be any curtailment of the currentcommunity service obligations by government. That is another point made by CouncillorBlack. Given those assurances, I am intrigued that you say, ‘Absorb the losses and letgovernment continue to run it.’

Mr Astill —That is the statement we clearly made. I think you must understandthat it is a small community and within that community I would meet, through thecommittees I am involved on, with the same 30 people on and off. I am sure that we dohave similar thoughts, if those thoughts have come down there. The Chamber ofCommerce has talked to council in relation to their thoughts and we have spoken to MrMcGarry, and he gave us figures in relation to the tourist industry that we did not have. Ifout of that we have come up with the same scenario, so be it. But I think, clearly, we arelooking for the government to look at the option of maintaining the railways, but on amore cost-effective basis.

Senator FERRIS—I draw to your attention yesterday’s AdelaideAdvertiser



editorial headed, ‘The desert city needs a fair go.’ It is talking about Port Augusta, butclearly it is equally applicable to Broken Hill. The statement is made about the rail systemthat:

Whatever future the system faces, it can only be as part of private enterprise. In that sense, the gameis up.

Do you have any comment to make on that?

Mr Astill —I think everybody has the right to an opinion and someone clearly hasa different opinion to the Chamber of Commerce.

Senator BOB COLLINS—I do not need to ask any questions, I have read thesubmission. Could I just say quickly, and we have an obligation to do this at the firstavailable opportunity, that Senator Ferris earlier referred to a newspaper article in theAdelaideAdvertiser, quoting something which I allegedly said yesterday in relation to ANand NR. Senator Ferris, I might add, accurately quoted the newspaper report.

At a later stage it will be in theHansard, but I just wanted to indicate to thecommittee now that the report is not accurate. Unfortunately, not only does it not quoteme accurately, it goes on to wrongly talk about the failure to take equity shares in ANwhen, in fact, there were never any equity shares being offered in AN. The newspaperarticle should have read ‘equity shares in National Rail’. So they got that wrong as well. Iwanted to take the opportunity now to correct that misreporting.

CHAIR —I am sure it is important that you do so.

Senator CALVERT—I notice, Mr Chairman, they have rectified one of theproblems you have had all week.

CHAIR —That is good. I had some problems too, with the media.

Senator WEST—Not with the Broken Hill media.

CHAIR —As there are no further questions, let me say again, Mr Astill, thank youvery much for your evidence. It certainly adds to our understanding of regional and ruralissues, which is absolutely critical because that is the fundamental interest of thiscommittee. That is not necessarily so for all senators but certainly it is true of the senatorson this committee. There may be other supplementary evidence that you can supply to usand we would be very happy to have that.

Can I indicate, as I did this morning, that there will be some opportunity at the endof this hearing at 12.30 p.m. for people from the community to make a short statement.We need to have some formality to that. At the back is Maurice who needs you to fill in a



form and then we will be happy to have statements from people. We will probably limitthem to about three minutes and there will not be any questions. If there are statementsfrom the community, we will be happy to give you some time to make those at the end ofthe hearing.

[11.06 p.m.]

BUTCHER, Mr Edward James, President, Barrier Industrial Council, Box 1, TradesHall, Broken Hill, New South Wales 2880

CONDON, Mr John Robert, Chairman, Operations Division—Far West New SouthWales, Public Transport Union, 333 Sussex Street, Sydney, New South Wales

CHAIR —Welcome. I invite you both to make opening statements, then we willask you some questions.

Mr Butcher —The Barrier Industrial Council is of the firm belief that theprivatisation of the railways is going to be very bad for people who live in the far westerndivision of New South Wales, and for the rest of the country. We seem to suffer all thetime from, as we term it, the ‘wise men from the east’ who make all these decisions anddo not really understand—

CHAIR —There are more than three, I believe!

Mr Butcher —They do not really understand what it is like to live in isolated andremote areas. Rail has been the life blood of Broken Hill. In 1924 there were water truckscarting water here for people to survive and we had a private railway which was classedas a tramway under the constitution—the Silverton Tramway Company—which servicedus for many years. We have an infrastructure here and the rail is most important. We havean airport and we have a 19-seat plane that flies to Adelaide. We have people who travelto Adelaide daily if they can, and they have to use buses, but the older people prefer touse rail. In relation to medical treatment at the local hospital, we have to send people tospecialists in South Australia. The older people sometimes cannot fly and cannot sit on abus for a great length of time, so they take the rail.

People may say the rail is subsidised. But, to my way of thinking, since therailways began they were always built for the people; they were not built to be profitmaking propositions. They were built to open the country up so that people could go toand fro across the country, and for the cartage of freight. I believe the government is onthe wrong track—and I will not back down from that. The railways were built by thepeople—paid for with taxes—and for the people, to service them. They were not there tomake a million or two million dollars profit. If we privatise them, it will be like the bankswhere there are that many charges and every time you go to an ATM they are going tocharge you. Where is it going to end? People in the far west are voters too. They have gota right to have some say in it and they say to me that they do not want the rail privatised.They believe that it is for the people.



We also have the freight situation. Broken Hill is an export town. Whether youbelieve it or not, everything that comes out of Broken Hill is exported. Our minerals areexported—they go by rail to Port Pirie and other places where they are treated and aresent overseas. Our wool clip is all exported from Broken Hill. If you look at Menindee,the grapes grown there and other horticulture going on there is all exported—mainly, itgoes overseas. Without the infrastructure of the rail we will not be able to do that.

You have only got to walk down the main street and see how many semitrailersare going through Broken Hill, or travel round the country roads, which are not of thegood standard that people from the east are used to, and see the amount of doublesemitrailers—we call them ‘doubles’ now—that are going through. In my position as aunion official I have to travel a fair bit to other areas and I see up to 60 of these doubleson the road at any one time.

What are we going to do? Are we going to clog our roads up so much that thenormal person will not be able to drive his vehicle on them, because we have taken off therail on which we used to freight everything? I believe that, if the passenger service is notprofitable, eventually they will privatise the freight service; and that will not be profitableunless they can jack it up, so eventually they will close the line. I am not a seer; I havenot got a crystal ball. But if you go on past practice you know what goes on.

I would really like to know what the government has benchmarked the railway on.I have seen no reports on it. It was seen fit that the people out here did not get thesereports so we could know what was going on. All we have got is what we have seen inthe press and the media to tell us what is going on.

Maybe the people in Broken Hill do use some subsidised tickets to Adelaide, butyou must realise that we have an ageing population—who are still voters, I might add!The ageing population has come about because people are retiring here to live, to spendtheir time here because of the climatic conditions we have. We also have a lot of otherpeople. I have a daughter who used the rail yesterday to come home from Adelaide withtwo small children. She is by herself with two small children, and that is the only meansof transport that they have got. What happens to these people? They get chucked to thewolves. That is really good, isn’t it? You have got electors and you are going to chuckthem to the wolves.

Not everyone is on really big money. You have got these little railway places alongthe side of the road—there are not many of them left—where a lot of people can still useit. We used to have the Indian Pacific twice a week, but now it is down to once a week. Ithank Bob Carr for what he has done by putting the service back on to Sydney, becausewe were lucky in that. If you have ever sat on a bus for 22 or 23 hours to get to Sydney,you will know what it is like: it is not a very nice ride. I know most of you people wouldbe catching aircraft and flying around the country, which is quite a good means oftransport. It is quite quick, and you are there in a hurry; but the normal person, the aged



and infirm, cannot afford to do those sorts of things and they have still got to have theirservices.

To me, the government is turning its back on its people. I have heard all thepromises before, and from both sides of the fence. I will not comment on that, becausethey say that it will not happen tomorrow but it will happen. If the government does turnits back and privatise these sections, it will be like everything else. We were told in SouthAustralia that the price of water would not go up when it was privatised, but anyone whogets a water bill from South Australia now knows that it has gone up. I have a son livingdown there, and I know that from what he tells me.

So where do we go? We take the service from the people who have paid taxes alltheir lives and lived in these remote areas, opening this area up and producing enormousamounts of wealth for the Commonwealth government. The Commonwealth governmentused Broken Hill money for the Commonwealth Aircraft Corporation during the SecondWorld War, in order to build aircraft and other military things. That money all came fromBroken Hill. Not many people know that nowadays, but it was all done with Broken Hillmoney that was sent out from the community.

The minerals that come out of Broken Hill and go to Port Pirie keep two townsalive: they keep Port Pirie alive and they keep Broken Hill alive. If we close that railcorridor, how are the mines going to shift those minerals? They will be back on the roadsagain. Are the roads good enough to take that? The answer is simply no, they are notgood enough. With that, I will pass over to John who is an ex-railway worker. He was oneof those unfortunate people who lost their jobs in the restructuring processes. As you cansee, it is not good for anyone, and I will let John say a few more words about the rail. Heknow quite a lot more than I do.

Mr Condon—Thanks, Eddie. In the past eight years there have been 70 local jobslost from the railways, jobs of people living locally. These are drivers, cleaners, labourers,ground staff and technical persons, such as assistant station masters: even the stationmaster’s job here has been struck off. In the event of the Indian Pacific being rerouted,there will be a loss of at least a further eight jobs that I can think of currently thismorning.

Labour practices that were mooted earlier have been stripped right to the bone. Thereason taxis were used to transfer drivers to pick up the next programmed train was sothey could enjoy their eight-hour break before they picked up the next train. Everybody isentitled to a 16-hour break, normally, in town. It was because of the retrenchment of thecall car driver and the selling off of the call car that we use taxis. At the cost of $400 perfare against a man’s wages, you can see where the benefit went in that.

Until eight years ago, Broken Hill was the biggest inland wool port in Australia.People from the far north, people who rarely get heard of, also contribute a lot to Broken



Hill. Their woolclip was brought here and dumped at the station on a 24-hour, 7-day aweek basis, and it was loaded and shipped from there to either Sydney or Adelaide,whichever wool market was going. In a lot of cases, it was taken directly to the wharf andshipped on. That is another side of industry that has never been considered. Nowadays theproperty owners have to take their clip from their property direct to whichever wool portor wool store their clip is going to.

In the demise of the Indian Pacific service I can only say that we do enjoy achoice of three different variants of rail travel between here and Sydney, but if the IndianPacific was taken away or re-routed, our main rail service from here to Adelaide, which isgeographically the true capital for Broken Hill—where our people go to see specialists andfor education and things like that—would be just gone. That is where we stand. Beforewhen we had two Indian Pacifics, plus an Alice going through here, plus the Bluebirdservice, we had what you would normally have if you were, say, from Dubbo east. Wehad a seven day a week rail service, like Goulburn, Newcastle or any other village the sizeof our town. Because of where we are, it seems that New South Wales does not want toknow us, South Australia does not need us and, particularly, the Commonwealth onlycomes here when there are votes around or something like this. We do get thrown a bonehere and there and that is how the second Indian Pacific came into service not long ago.You people would know more about that than I do but for a while after the Greinerscenario we only had one Indian Pacific coming through Broken Hill.

I think instead of this taking off and re-routing passenger services—we are entitledto a passenger service the same as everybody else. It is not going to create that manymore jobs. I think the amount of people we have got there now would be able to stretchout to cover what is going on, so we are not talking about re-employment. I would sayfrom a citizen and a union person that we could do with more passenger services betweenhere and the west and that is about all I have got to say.

CHAIR —Thank you both for that evidence. I guess this is a leading question, butI am looking for comment. There has been a fair bit of debate about the communityservice obligations of the government in terms of railways which include things likemaking sure there are services to remote areas, the subsidised ticket system and so on. Iguess there is no doubt in your mind that community service obligations ought to be partof the government’s commitment.

Mr Butcher —If you look at it, these older people have worked all of their life andpaid taxes. Some of the younger people, no, okay, but not every one of them is able-bodied. We have people who are disabled and the only way they can travel is by rail. Arewe going to chuck these people with disabilities to the wolves? Is that what thegovernment’s agenda is, that is what I am saying. A lot of people do suffer disabilities andthe only way they can travel is by rail. If we are going to start that we might as well go toNazi Germany.



Mr Condon—If we lived in Albury, we could get a passenger train either way toeither Melbourne or Sydney every day and maybe have a choice of a morning or anevening service. We are asking for no more than they have.

CHAIR —Are you not confident that the government would continue, say, to payfor those community service obligations independently of whether it is privatised or not?

Mr Butcher —No.

CHAIR —You do not think they would?

Mr Butcher —I do not think they would.

CHAIR —From the evidence today I found it very interesting—I was not awarethat this was so common—that quite clearly the train is used by Broken Hill people as, ifyou like, a commuter service to go to Adelaide for a whole lot of reasons and I presumeto Sydney too. If the government were to treat the Indian Pacific service simply as atourist attraction, would you be confident that commuters—if for instance the prices wereincreased to make it more attractive to tourists, I imagine that would have a detrimentalaffect on commuters because one reason is the price, I presume.

Mr Butcher —That is a reason. Also, there are two special cars for Broken Hill onthe Indian Pacific separate from the rest of the IP. They are commonly known as dogboxes, actually. There are only sit-up seats.

Mr Condon—They are known as tourist class now.

Mr Butcher —A lot of people call them dog boxes because they are a second ratecarriage to what the IP is. But they are still used and records show there are no vacantseats normally. They are full all the time. As I said, not everyone out here can afford theluxury of a motor car or air travel.

CHAIR —That is all I had to ask.

Senator WEST—I have asked every other witness representing organisations thisquestion: was there any consultation with your organisation about the Brew report?

Mr Butcher —No; only what we have read in the media, in newspapers, and haveheard on the electronic media.

Senator WEST—So Broken Hill, as one of the major users of the Indian Pacificand the freight section, has had no consultation at all?

Mr Butcher —To my recollection there has been no consultation at all.




Senator FERRIS—You talked about international benchmarking. It may be ofsome assistance to draw your attention to a speech made by Mr Brereton on 18 April 1994where he said that international benchmarking studies have shown that rail must lift itsgame, must overcome its present problems, if it is to match our internationally competitiveroad transport industry. I am afraid I do not have those international benchmarking studiesbut, very clearly, they do exist.

Mr Butcher —I believe that it had to be done against something, but what do youput it against? It is no good trying to benchmark it against a place in the United States ofAmerica, which has a population of 240 million, for a place like Australia, which has apopulation of 18 million. You can benchmark it against another country that has 18million and the same rail infrastructure, if there is one. But, when you start benchmarkingagainst things like that, that is just talking on the ridiculous.

Senator FERRIS—During the last 10 years or so there has been increasingcomment about the need for increasing competition and increasing private sectorinvolvement. In fact, a similar speech said that our transport policy agenda is based on,among other things, ‘a greater role for the private sector and infrastructure provision’. Didyou oppose this increasing competition in the past?

Mr Butcher —I have always opposed privatisation of anything that the people havepaid for. I must admit that. I am a taxpayer. I have been a taxpayer for 35 years or more.My taxes have gone into building the infrastructure of this country. I am a fifth generationAustralian. My family’s previous generations were all working class people, and theirtaxes have built that infrastructure. Why do we then have to privatise this so that otherpeople can make money out of it?

Senator FERRIS—Presumably that view extends to the Commonwealth Bank andQantas?

Mr Butcher —Of course it does. I was totally opposed to it. I will admit that andsay it on the record.

Senator FERRIS—But your comments this morning, Mr Butcher, seem to indicatethat you think that if this is privatised it will all disappear, that the rail lines will be tornup and that there will be no railways. The Commonwealth Bank and Qantas have notdisappeared—in fact, they have thrived—under private ownership. So where do you getthe idea that the railways will disappear under private ownership?

Mr Butcher —I used to have an account with the Commonwealth Bank but I havechanged it because, if I had under $300 in that account, they charged me $2 a week. Whatwill happen to the railways? If I book a seat, do I have to pay $2 a week until such time



as I get on that seat? As I said, you cannot use them as benchmarks. With Qantas, I amstill opposed to it. It has been only partially sold off, as you know. It has not been totallysold, and you do not see it making a hell of a big profit.

Senator FERRIS—No, but it is fulfilling its community service obligations. Iguess what we are talking about here is choice.

Mr Butcher —That is true. You talk about privatisation. I will tell you whatprivatisation does: it makes the wealthy get wealthier at the expense of the poorer peoplewho live in communities like ours.

Senator FERRIS—And I take that point entirely. I am sure the Barrier IndustrialCouncil has been devastated by the loss of 70 jobs in this town due to governmentmanagement—and I make no comment about which government—of railways, federal andstate. It seems so obvious to me that this continued management is not going to result inmore permanent jobs for people on the railways, and I am intrigued that you would wantit to continue that way.

Mr Butcher —The jobs have gone, and I believe they were wrong in the way theydid it. But I also believe that the people of this community have to have some mode oftransport. If it is privatised, there are people here who just will not be able to afford it. Ido not know if you have seen our local hospital—we are getting a new one built and it isgoing to be a 76-ward hospital, which is far too small in my opinion—but we have peoplewho daily go to Adelaide to seek medical treatment. These people cannot afford to fly.Senator, I would love you to sit on one of these buses for a while and just see what it islike and drive around this country.

This is isolation. This area is nearly desert, it is semi-arid. The Flying Doctorcomes in and does treatment. If we have people injured, the Flying Doctor has got to flythem away, but they cannot fly everyone, otherwise it would just be a space shuttle typeof exercise—it would be backwards and forwards all day. So they use the rail.

You were talking about the government and the privatisation of the CommonwealthBank. Banking is totally different to rail infrastructure. A bank is for people who have gotmoney to make money out of. If you look at what has happened, as I said, to theCommonwealth Bank, the fees and charges have taken that much off the lower paidperson and the person on the pension and everything else because their accounts get thesecharges on them.

I cannot comment too much on Qantas because Qantas, in their wisdom, do not flyto Broken Hill. They would not even quote to take the airline on—maybe there was notenough profit in there for them. The reason there is not enough profit I suppose is becausepeople use the rail structure.



Senator FERRIS—I am interested in the comment that was made in theAdvertiserabout the other desert city of South Australia, Port Augusta. In Port Augustathey now accept that continued government ownership of the railways is not going todeliver the certainty of jobs that they have had in the past. They are willing to accept thatprivate ownership may assist in that. You are still fundamentally opposed to that.

Mr Butcher —Unfortunately, I did not read yesterday’sAdvertiserso I cannotcomment on it. I do not believe in buying theAdvertiserbecause I think it is a verybiased newspaper. I do actually buy theSydney Telegraphevery day—

Senator Bob Collins—The only bit of it I read was wrong.

Mr Butcher —I live in New South Wales and I try to be part of New South Walesbut, as has been said before, Adelaide is our closest capital and we are more reliant on it.Knowing theAdvertiserto be biased at different times, I refuse to buy what I class as atrashy newspaper, even though it is a broadsheet.

You are putting a person in an invidious situation by asking him to comment onsomething he knows nothing about. I know people from Port Augusta who are totallyopposed to it. One of their train drivers comes up here, he drives from there to here now,stops overnight and drives back. The reason he is doing it is that he has to keep his job.He has got a family to feed as well.

If you looked at what happened with the privatisation of other areas around theworld, globally it has not been good. Margaret Thatcher, in her wisdom, started to do allthis type of caper, and look what they are paying for water and everything in Englandnow. What do people pay taxes for? What do we live in these remote communities for?We would have the right, if we saw fit, to come over and live with the wise people of theeast, as I said, and use a rail infrastructure that is never, ever going to make a profit, butyou can move backwards and forwards on a daily basis for a minimal amount. Those railswill never make a profit. But I suppose that is where the electors are and the governmentsees fit and says, ‘We can run this and that, and pat them on the back so we can get a fewmore votes.’ That does not work. We are all Australians and we should be treated equally.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Just one question on the same matter, Mr Butcher, justto clarify this for the committee. Obviously the community has got an interest inmaintaining both freight and passenger services—

Mr Butcher —Most definitely.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Your submission concentrated, for the reasons yougave, on passenger services. Would the nub of your concern about privatisation be relatedto the fact that rail passenger services around the world, with the exception of thosebetween major population centres, all lose money?



Mr Butcher —Naturally, yes.

Senator BOB COLLINS—That, of course, applies and evidence was given to thiscommittee earlier today by the mayor, I think it was, of Broken Hill—rightly, I thought,and he made a very valid point—that that also applies to urban rail systems and indeedurban bus systems and urban ferry systems which do not make a profit. The fact that theydo not make a profit does not mean that governments stand up and say, ‘Oh, that’s notmaking money, we will close it down.’ The services are provided as a public service forthose commuters.

Is your concern about privatisation that, in respect of passenger services inparticular which will not make a profit, a privatised rail service concentrating, as it mustdo, on providing a return to the shareholders would simply not operate at all to acommunity such as Broken Hill if it were not returning a profit?

Mr Butcher —I believe that is what will happen. I believe that if it is not making aprofit they are going to say, ‘Okay, we will close that section down’. You have got tolook at your rail freight too. The mining companies send X amount of freight away now. Ibelieve that if it is privatised that will go up because they can see they can make a quidout of them. They will increase the freight charges because they are not going to make itout of the people. Eventually, if it is not profitable, we all know what happens. If it isprivatised, it goes. Shareholders are not going to put money into things they are not goingto get a quid out of. I believe the government should run the railways as they werestructured for in the beginning, to open up the country and service the remotecommunities.

Senator CALVERT—You seem to be inferring that it if something is privatised, itgoes. On the other hand, you made the point—and I think it is a very important point—that Broken Hill needs a very good link with Adelaide and Sydney or wherever so thatyou can travel in comfort. A lot of the customers of the IP are pensioners. They do notpay anything, I believe. Is that right?

Mr Butcher —It depends, some pay a bit. I know people who have children andthey pay for their children.

Mr Condon—They get one ticket a year.

Mr Butcher —Some people might do 12 trips a year. We used to have a little buddcar going from Broken Hill to Adelaide. It was a viable service and people loved it. Iwould dearly love to see that back.

Senator CALVERT—Why was it closed down?

Mr Butcher —Because in some government restructure they decided we did not



need it. As I said, the wise men from the east always seem to know what is better for usout here, without consulting us.

Senator CALVERT—How long ago was it closed down?

Mr Butcher —Five years ago.

Senator CALVERT—By the state or federal government?

Mr Condon—It was an Australian National passenger service. The budd cars wereorganised by the United States to run from Adelaide to Woomera during the Maralingaatomic bomb testing in the 1950s. These were refurbished by Australian National and theyran them up here. One was called the Silvercity Express, but they declined.

Senator CALVERT—Did they close it down because it was costing too muchmoney?

Mr Condon—I am not too sure, but they were well patronised.

Senator CALVERT—The evidence we have had so far—and I am not arguingabout the community service obligations—is that if you have a train service, no matterwho runs it, whether it is the government or anybody else, I think you are entitled to getsome return for your money. But if everyone is travelling for nothing virtually then it isnever going to do any good and the services that you require are going to get less and lessbecause—

Mr Condon—Senator Calvert, please remember that only a small proportion of ourpassengers are pensioners! We have a lot of paying people travelling on trains.

Senator CALVERT—I asked earlier today—

Mr Condon—I understand why there are a lot of managers in government becausethey would not get a job in private enterprise, and that is a fact. If you look at that side ofthings you can understand why the passenger rail system is not making any money. Doyou know what the price of a can of beer is on the Indian Pacific? No, you do not. It isjust under $4. I can go to some flash pubs in Sydney such as the Menzies and I will stillbuy a can of beer cheaper than that. If they are not making money I think we had betterhave a look at the corruption side of things. They can afford to put the price of beer upyet they are sacking people! Where is the equilibrium?

Senator CALVERT—I doubt whether the price of beer would really help with—

Mr Condon—I am using that as an example.



Senator CALVERT—You said your daughter came up from Adelaide. How muchwould it cost?

Mr Butcher —It was $40.

Senator CALVERT—What would it cost in a bus or—?

Senator WEST—It costs $165 on the plane from Adelaide to here.

Mr Butcher —On the bus it is about $48.

Senator CALVERT—About $48 in a bus?

Mr Butcher —Yes, but with two little children it is very hard to sit on a bus.

Senator CALVERT—I am not arguing with that, I am just trying to get some ideaof what it costs.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Bus fares are normally structured in comparison to railfares. That is normally—

Mr Butcher —Senator Calvert, you are saying we privatise our railways. What’snext? Our roads? Our bitumen black tops? Are you going to say we will privatise themnext and put a toll on them so we can make more profit for the private people? That isexactly the same mode of transport—one is rail, one is by road—and the way it is leading,you are going to privatise all the roads because you cannot afford the upkeep on them andthen we will be paying a toll so we can drive on our roads.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Mr Chairman, with respect to Senator Calvert’squestion I wonder whether we could clarify it. This is an important matter that SenatorCalvert has raised, which Mr Condon, clearly, from his experience is disputing. But thecommittee has been given evidence that on a great many of these train trips—and theymay not necessarily be the Broken Hill one; they could be ones across the Nullarbor—avery significant number of passengers pay either nothing or almost nothing for the trips.You are saying that on this service that is a minority. The committee has been givenevidence that in fact—

Mr Condon—I will take that on board, Senator Collins. I am not talking about theNullarbor; I am not talking about Sydney; I am talking about between here and our truecapital—Adelaide.

Senator BOB COLLINS—That is why it is important to clarify it.

Mr Condon—What Mr Butcher has not said is that the majority of our workers



who are on pensions now are blokes with broken backs from the mining industry. Thosebuses were not designed for comfort. Everybody knows that. I am quite sure a portly chaplike yourself would not be comfortable in a bus, would you?

Senator BOB COLLINS—I am comfortable almost wherever I am.

Mr Condon—Well, you know what I am trying to say.

Senator BOB COLLINS—As they say in the classics, I am built for comfort, notspeed, Mr Condon.

Mr Condon—But, if you had the choice, if you were enduring pain and you wereensured of a nice comfortable trip in the Indian Pacific from here to Adelaide, comparedwith a trip on a bus that left at midday and stopped quite often in villages between hereand Adelaide, I am quite sure, at a comparable price, you would take the train; wouldn’tyou?

Senator BOB COLLINS—I would take the train, Mr Condon, on every possibleoccasion wherever I travel—

Mr Condon—Thank you.

Senator BOB COLLINS—In fact, I inquired about getting a train from BrokenHill to my next destination, but there is a problem—and you have invited me to commenton this. I have lived in the Northern Territory for more than 30 years, and I love traintravel passionately—

Senator WEST—You do not get too much in the Northern Territory.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Exactly. I am a romantic. We have in the NorthernTerritory a famous train called the Ghan, and I have to concede that, as much as I lovetrain travel, in over 30 years of living in the Northern Territory I have travelled on theGhan once, and that was when I was transport minister. The reason for that is quitesimple: it is 1,500 kilometres from Darwin to Alice Springs, and then it is 22 hours on theGhan. With the kind of job that I have, I simply cannot afford to spend that much timetravelling when air is an alternative. It is an important point, and I think a lot ofpoliticians, frankly, lose track of it.

In the whole of my public life, and I have been a member of parliament for 20years, my tickets of course have been paid for by you and others. I think it is important toconstantly reflect on the fact that, because you fly so much yourself, you often considerthat everybody does. The reason I make the point is that Senator West has just showed methe cost of a ticket today, and it is obvious that, if you are having to pay that in BrokenHill to go to Adelaide or Sydney and you are on a fixed income or you are a pensioner,



you would not be doing it too many times a year.

Mr Butcher —Even as a working class person you cannot afford it.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Absolutely. That is a full, frank and honest answer toyour question. That is one of the problems with train travel in terms of patronage, but theyare wonderful services. I think it is the greatest, safest and the most enjoyable form oftravel ever invented by humankind. But these days because of the time involved fewpeople generally choose to travel that way on long-distance trips.

Mr Butcher —The other point I must raise is booking. To get a ticket you mustbook here at least two weeks in advance.

Senator CALVERT—Isn’t that because a lot of tickets are booked out of Sydneyor somewhere else 12 months ahead?

Mr Butcher —That is right.

Senator CALVERT—That is what we were told yesterday.

Mr Butcher —And we have the two extra carriages from Broken Hill.

Senator BOB COLLINS—I am sorry, Senator Calvert; could you repeat that?

Senator CALVERT—Because a lot of pensioners book all these seats 12 monthsahead, the fare paying passengers in the short term cannot get on the trains because theyare booked out.

Mr Butcher —As I said before, we have on the IP two carriages for Broken Hill.

Senator CALVERT—Yes, I realise that.

Mr Butcher —And for the other ones you still have to book two weeks in advance.

Senator CALVERT—Still?

Mr Butcher —Yes. That has to be looked at. You say it is not being patronised.Well, it is being patronised.

Senator CALVERT—The point I am trying to make is that, in two days ofquestioning, we still do not have a line on the usage of rail, particularly the Indian Pacific,and just how many passengers are fare paying passengers and how many are not. Isuppose somewhere along the line we might get a bit of a line somewhere.



Mr Butcher —It might be the tall poppy syndrome. I think that is what youemploy managers and managing directors of a company for, and they should have suppliedthat information.

Senator BOB COLLINS—We will get that information from AN.

Mr Condon—Are you aware that the Indian Pacific doubled in length six weeksago for the festival of wildflowers in Western Australia? Instead of being a 16-car train, itwas pumped up to about 30 or 32. That was maintained for, I think, about a month. Asyou get more people wanting to get on it they just lengthen the train. That was a featurehere in the spring for the festival of the flowers in Western Australia, taking the eastpeople to the west and vice versa. There are all your paying customers. You just have togo through the train figures for that.

Senator FERRIS—How do you know they were full fare paying passengers?

Mr Condon—Because I was carrying most of their suitcases around—people thatwere joining the train here.

Mr Butcher —John used to work in the railways before he was retrenched.

Senator FERRIS—I understand that but are you able to provide us with evidenceof the proportion of people who were on those trains at that time who were actually fullfare paying passengers?

Mr Condon—Not now I am retrenched, Senator, no. I have had a few doorsclosed to me.

Senator CALVERT—According to some information we have here, back in 1991-92 between 50 and 60 per cent were concession holders or non-paying passengers on therailways. That is interstate rail passengers.

Mr Butcher —Have those people paid? They have paid the bill of that railwaysystem through their taxes over the years, the same as their forebears did so they havepaid. Even though they may be non-paying now they are getting a reward back from thegovernment from what they have given to the government.

Senator CALVERT—You said 70 jobs have been lost in Broken Hill and thereare eight jobs remaining: is that all that is left in Broken Hill?

Mr Condon—Yes, about eight but I think it looks like we will have a furtherbloke to speak about that. There will be another four of them going before June or July.

Senator CALVERT—They would basically only be working in the booking area,



would they?

Mr Condon—No, the signals section.

Senator CALVERT—Is there a freight service that still comes into Broken Hill?

Mr Condon—This is where there is a lot of confusion coming out of this meeting.People keep saying freight and AN. They are two different people. National Rail is thenew freight centre. That is going through here. That is already up and running.

Senator CALVERT—Why doesn’t the wool freight matter here any more?

Mr Condon—I beg your pardon?

Senator CALVERT—Did not Broken Hill used to be the centre for the wool?You used to freight all the wool out of here?

Mr Condon—Yes.

Senator CALVERT—Is that happening now?

Mr Condon—No, the freight centre was closed. That is the area that Mr Astillnow uses for his office.

CHAIR —So the wool goes by road now?

Mr Condon—It goes from the property—it goes A to B. It goes from the propertyto Adelaide or Sydney.

Senator CALVERT—Surely if there is a rail service and it is good enough andcheap enough they would have still continued to use the rail, would they not?

Mr Condon—That was the reason that freight centres closed everywhere all overthe state. The government at the time forced the prices up so it was above the road pricesso naturally they had to go to the road and they could strip the freight centres.

Senator CALVERT—How would they force the prices up?

Mr Condon—They just put the prices up. They were dearer than the roads were.

Mr Butcher —They wanted to get rid of the railway system.

Mr Condon—That is the way they do it all the time.



Mr Butcher —The previous Liberal government in New South Wales closedrailway lines down and did anything they could. They even took the Silvercity Comet offand quite a few other things. They wanted to close the railway system because it was aburden on the government but where all the voters are in Sydney they increased it. Theywere given all the new Tarago trains and everything else and they looked good. They saidthat only 1 million people live in the bush and we have 5 million people living in Sydney,so we will give it to the people in the east and we will take it from the people in the west.People out here in these communities fear the same thing will happen again if this isprivatised. I have no fear that if it was privatised within three years we would not have arail system operating in areas like this.

Senator CALVERT—The creation of National Rail really has not helped thesituation much either, has it?

Mr Condon—No, they are the competition to coastal shipping. They are allcontainers: no small parcels and no person to person. The trains are much longer, fewermen are crewing them and they are going twice the distance. Whereas our crews used tochange at Ivanhoe, Ivanhoe has been wiped off the map—devastated, 30 jobs lost there, 30plus 70 is a hundred. We were looking at that last year. That is how many jobs have beenlost in the railway system. We are not talking about Ivanhoe. We are just talking abouthere. The only New South Wales drivers we have got left here now are driving from hereto Parkes.

When it comes to National Rail it is another ball game. They agreed to submit tothese new conditions to do double the distance.

Senator CALVERT—As a former driver, you would be aware of the fight goingon between National Rail and AN, would you not?

Mr Condon—The fact of the matter is that National Rail have gone all through allthe Australian national depots and picked the eyes out of what they want. They have takenall the money-making things out of it, the non-maintenance type of things, and they haveleft Australian National holding the baby so that they cannot create money to pay theirbills and Australian National has been left on the vine. That is a fact. The locomotivemaintenance which was being done at Port Augusta is now being done by a privateconcern in Melbourne. So naturally the workshops in Port Augusta cannot make anymoney.

Senator CALVERT—But a lot of it is being done at Dry Creek too, is it not?

Mr Condon—Yes. But I am talking about the major thing, the power by the hour,where the locomotive comes out and it will work for a month before it goes back into thenew DASH-9 class, which you will see on the rail—



Senator CALVERT—You mean that it is going to Spotswood?

Mr Condon—I am not too sure what it is.

Senator CALVERT—But why would they want to duplicate things—those aresome of the things that we have struck?

Mr Condon—Because they are only leasing the locomotives, they do not ownthem.

Senator CALVERT—And they are still building new ones?

Mr Condon—Yes, they are only leasing them. They have ordered 100, I think.

Senator FERRIS—They are currently registered in New South Wales.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Exactly the same way as airlines lease aircraft.

Senator CALVERT—It is incredible, they are building these locos in New SouthWales, and yet they cannot be used in New South Wales because they do not conform.

Mr Condon—They are being used by the customer in New South Wales. This isthe one at Clyde you are talking about. They build locomotives for Queensland.

Senator CALVERT—This is National Rail’s ones.

Mr Condon—The DASH-9, you are talking about.

Senator CALVERT—They are being built in Newcastle, but they do not conform.I think Senator Collins brought that point out.

CHAIR —We need to draw it to a close. As there are no further questions, I thankyou very much for your evidence. It has been very helpful. The whole of Broken Hilltoday has helped us a lot, I think.



[11.48 a.m.]

LONGFELLOW, Mr Raymond John, Councillor, Central Darling Shire Council,Reid Street, Wilcannia, New South Wales

CHAIR —Welcome. In what capacity are you appearing today?

Mr Longfellow —I am from Ivanhoe. I am acting on behalf of the Central DarlingShire Council where this line passes through the shire, and it is one of the communitiesthat has been devastated through the closure of rail services.

CHAIR —If you could give the committee a brief opening statement, that wouldput the views that you want us to hear, and then we will ask some questions.

Mr Longfellow —I feel that everybody that is appearing has more or less got theirhands tied when we talk about finances and figures that can be thrown around by thegovernment of the day, AN, or any other organisation, when, in fact, those figures are notavailable to people such as ourselves.

When I tried to find out the costing of the lease agreement between AN and NewSouth Wales railways, I was told that this was a commercial-in-confidence agreement andwas not available to the public. I find that pretty hard to fathom, when you realise we aretalking about taxpayers’ money. Every time that we have gone and made any contact withrail, whether it be national or state, we get the same answer.

The suggestions of economics with the rail, both passenger and freight, I thinkleaves a lot to be desired in that, where a very accurate figure can be given by therailway, it cannot be given by the comparative transport of road. If you were to give us acomparison of what it cost to move tonnage, or one tonne, from point A to B by rail, andcould give me also what it costs by road, I would be very interested. And I would also bevery interested in the passenger side of it.

We know that in the road section, those using that are more or less only costing itfor the facility they are providing, which is the bus which they are providing, the cost oftheir drivers, the cost of fuel. The end result is that they have to run on something, andwho is paying for the road? We are finding that the RTA in New South Wales is handingmore and more of the responsibility of roads back to the local councils. We are finding itvery difficult to keep the roads in good enough order, as somebody said here earlier. Thefact remains that if you are going to compare the two then let us have a justified cost ofboth, not just one side of it.

You talk about rail closures, et cetera. I have first-hand knowledge of that, comingfrom Ivanhoe, where we have just lost another 15 people out of a population of 500. Welost eight earlier on. That leaves a sour taste in the mouths of the businesses that are



trying to operate. It also has a snowballing effect which affects our heath services, ourschooling, our policing and various other institutions which others, I might add, take forgranted on the eastern seaboard or in the more highly populated areas.

I do not see that by privatising there is going to be a great gain. I think it is theeasy way out for a government, and I say that with all due respect to any government. Thepoint that I make is that if it is so good to go private, why wasn’t the cost that this hasblown out to at this stage addressed earlier? It is quite apparent that some of those in thetop echelons of management are receiving salaries which I can only compare to the sumof their egos.

You may laugh, Senator, and I appreciate that.

CHAIR —I am sure you are right.

Mr Longfellow —To see the demise of a community first hand is a frighteningaspect. You see the increase in crime. People have just lost interest in wanting to live inan area. We have people who were not directly associated with the rail who have now justtaken the attitude that the rail is gone, everything is lost and they are moving away fromthe town. As a shire, we have put infrastructure there for people to make it as comfortableas possible for them but the end result is that if you do not have jobs in the town thenpeople must move on. The railway does create jobs and it snowballs down the line if jobsare abolished. If your local businesses are getting a dollar, somebody will be employed.

There is the other unfortunate side of it where families who have lived in the areafor so many years are uprooted. All of a sudden we had AN put off 15 people just prior toChristmas. It was pretty good timing I thought by everybody concerned. One side blamesthe other. It is state versus the Commonwealth.

There is no easy solution. I think the government is taking the easy solution byprivatising. I think more stringent measures should be applied to National. Why can it besaid that privatised means better? I am at a loss for that. Has it taken us so many years torealise that the railways are not the way to go? Does it mean that railways are a thing ofthe past, which they look like being on this western line for passenger service if they goprivate?

As somebody pointed out previously, we appreciate and love the type of life thatwe live in the country. That is why we are here. I thought that the government that hasbeen elected federally was going to be a family government. They have lost the plot as faras rail is concerned, I can assure you, if they think privatisation is the way to go.

We hear talk of how they are going to make them a luxury-type mode of travel forthose types of tourists that may come in and can afford to spend this type of money, butMr and Mrs Average, the bloke that works out on the property or the bloke that is



working at the store, he will not be able to access that rail because it will be just too dear.I think that has been proven time and time again in countries where rail has beenprivatised. I will say straight away, before you ask me, that no, I have not travelled on aprivate railway—not even Puffing Billy.

Getting back to the safety factor of trains, when they closed the Ivanhoe station intheir wisdom, they decided they would take all the crewing from there, and all thatremains now is maintenance staff for the track. For that train to travel from Parkes toBroken Hill, which is something like just under 600 kilometres, there is no safetychecking point along that line for those carriages at all. I just wonder how much furtheralong the line the trains travel without having safety checks, and I am talking about brakeslocking on, goods moving on the decks of carriages, et cetera.I will not bother with anyfurther explanation, other than to say that first-hand, I reiterate, it is devastating to see acommunity die, and that is what we are seeing in our small community.

The necessity for a train service for Ivanhoe and for Central Darling is that all ourmedical complaints that are diagnosed by the Flying Doctor Service that operates out ofBroken Hill are all orientated this way. If by chance—more likely probability—thepassenger train service, once it is privatised, does happen to cease, what happens to thosepeople? I might also add that Ivanhoe would be the biggest town along the full length ofthat national rail line that has not got a sealed road into it, so if it rains we are at themercy of the Flying Doctor—and gratefully we are, too, I might add—but we have noother way of getting out of the town. Thank you.

CHAIR —Thank you, Mr Longfellow.

Senator CALVERT—Can I just make one comment? I find it unusual, to say theleast, to hear Mr Longfellow criticising the present government that has been here for 12months for trying to save the rail industry when, under the previous government, we haveseen 7,000 railway jobs go—70 in Broken Hill. We have seen the New South Walesfreight corporation slash jobs in Broken Hill and, as a result of the Brew report, thefederal government, the present government, is trying to look at saving the rail industry byprivatising it to keep the jobs, yet you are criticising them for trying to do somethingpositive. All we have seen over the last 10 or 15 years is continual downgrading of therailways and the loss of jobs.

Senator BOB COLLINS—The witness can answer for himself, but that is not infact what Mr Longfellow said and theHansardrecord will show it. He specifically said,and I heard him say it, that he had been a critic of all governments of whatever politicalcolour.

CHAIR —I am sure that Mr Longfellow can answer his own question. MrLongfellow, you have the floor.



Mr Longfellow —I am waiting for questions, Mr Chairman.

Senator CALVERT—Under the current arrangements, if AN continues, in yourexperience from what has happened at Ivanhoe, what would happen?

Mr Longfellow —If it was to continue in its present form I believe it would be amuch heavier burden. What I am saying to you, Senator Calvert, is that I believe thereshould be perhaps a restructuring inside National Rail, and I believe you go to the top, notstart at the bottom—go to the top. They are the ones who have been making the decision;they are the ones who have allowed this enormous figure to accrue over the period oftime. They were appointed—whether by Liberal, Labor or whoever—to do a job whichthey have badly neglected. I would suggest that a good review may be the answer there,and start right on the top of the ladder.

Senator CALVERT—Do you think we can afford to have two systems, NationalRail and AM, competing together?

Mr Longfellow —Competition never hurt anyone, did it?

Senator CALVERT—Yes, but they are both largely owned by government, that isthe problem. That is interesting what you say about competition. That is what privatisationwill bring, hopefully.

Mr Longfellow —Why can’t government do it?

Senator BOB COLLINS—Precisely.

Senator CALVERT—We have seen the competition between National Rail andAN and what that has done.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Why does privatisation necessarily mean competition,and competition necessarily mean privatisation?

Mr Longfellow —It is not going to end the problem if you do privatise it, except aslash and burn.

Senator FERRIS—As they have had.

Mr Longfellow —Maybe. But what I am trying to stress is, don’t start with theworkers who are doing their job properly, to the best of their ability. It is up on the topechelons that you start. They are the blokes—as I reiterated a while ago—whose salariesnearly match their egos. They are the ones that should be hauled in. May I respectfullyask, why aren’t some of those people being called before this committee?



CHAIR —We are seeing some of those.

Mr Longfellow —I would like to see all those.

CHAIR —We will be talking to Mr Brew on Monday for a couple of hours.

Senator BOB COLLINS—We are talking to him. I have one brief question whichis relevant to 1997, rather than transgressing the past. Mr Longfellow, as we speak, in1997, this current federal government is paying people wanting to travel to Tasmania adirect taxpayer-funded discount of somewhere around $300 per ticket for a return tripacross Bass Strait. Would your community, in fact, like to receive a similar benefit?

Mr Longfellow —Senator, we would love it.

Senator WEST—Just for my colleagues, Mr Longfellow—and I admit I have notbeen to Ivanhoe, except on the train, passing through in the middle of the night—can you,for the information ofHansardand for the record, say how many kilometres it is awayfrom Broken Hill?

Mr Longfellow —Yes. It is 318 kilometres.

Senator WEST—Broken Hill is your service centre, not just Ivanhoe?

Mr Longfellow —It is the service centre predominantly, and medically it is theservice centre for us.

Senator WEST—The road is not sealed?

Mr Longfellow —That is a lie. The last 110 kilometres from Menindee to BrokenHill is, but the other section is not; it is all dirt.

Senator WEST—I know it is all dirt, but it is not just dirt, it is black soil, is itnot?

Mr Longfellow —It is.

Senator WEST—How much rain does it take to make that impassable?

Mr Longfellow —You can talk about 10 points on the black country.

CHAIR —You know what they say about black soil, do you not? You stick to it inthe dry, it will stick to you in the wet.

Mr Longfellow —It does that too.



Senator WEST—Ivanhoe has no other public transport except the Indian Pacificand the Outback Explorer? Is that correct?

Mr Longfellow —Nothing whatsoever. I might make the observation that with theloss of the old Silver City Comet we went down to talk to Minister Baird. He made thevery smart comment of, ‘Well, if you haven’t got any other access we can put in a sealedroad beside the line.’

Senator WEST—Yes.

Mr Longfellow —Needless to say, it was an absolutely ridiculous statement for theminister to have made at that time, and still is.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Clearly, from the evidence you have just given, he didnot actually put in the sealed road beside the line.

Mr Longfellow —He certainly did not and we are still waiting for a sealed road.

Senator WEST—What is the area of Central Darling Shire? Maybe you want totake that on notice. I know it is very big.

Mr Longfellow —Yes, it is.

Senator WEST—Is the population base 4,000 or 5,000?

Mr Longfellow —It would be about 4,000.

Senator WEST—What is your income from rates per year?

Mr Longfellow —The shire operates on about 12 to 14 per cent of our incomebeing rates. I might add, after speaking with the auditor last Tuesday, that the CentralDarling Shire is perhaps one of the lowest rate-based orientated shires in New SouthWales.

Senator WEST—Central Darling has the Barrier Highway running right through,does it?

Mr Longfellow —On the northern side, yes. From Ivanhoe that is.

Senator WEST—I am talking about the shire.

Mr Longfellow —Yes, Wilcannia.

Senator WEST—Running through Wilcannia.



Mr Longfellow —Yes.

Senator WEST—And a number of other major roads?

Mr Longfellow —From Ivanhoe’s perspective, do you mean, or within the shire?

Senator WEST—Putting your council hat on as an alderman.

Mr Longfellow —As a councillor, within our shire we would be lucky to have anymore than about 80 kilometres of sealed road that is actually under the control of thecouncil. That is excluding the Barrier Highway.

Senator WEST—And that is controlled by the state, is it?

Mr Longfellow —That is controlled by RTA.

Senator WEST—What is the state of those roads? Are you seeing an increase intruck transportation and a decrease in rail transportation? Are you seeing the decrease inthe standard of your roads?

Mr Longfellow —It is a contentious issue as far as our shire is concerned. Yes,there is a definite decrease in the value of the road. As I said before, if there were aproper costing done between road versus rail, I would like to see it. I do not believe thatanybody has had the courage to do that.


Senator FERRIS—Could I just ask you to respond to a couple of observationsthat were made to me yesterday during an informal visit to the railway workshops at PortAugusta. They have been devastated, as your community has, by job losses. They havebeen reviewed to a point where you might say they have had job paralysis through workanalysis. They have now been split into four separate business units. They tell me thatthere is not one person in Port Augusta who can make a decision about any of the workthat they do. Sometimes it takes a week to get an answer from Adelaide.

All they want is some form of future job certainty. They believe the best way ofgetting that is to get some private sector funding into their workshops so that they can getsome jobs from outside their core business—which has been declining—and actually keeptheir jobs and start to build their lives again. Do you believe that the best option for yourcommunity is to continue to have no private sector involvement in the rail system?

Mr Longfellow —Could you elaborate on ‘no private sector involvement in the railsystem’?



Senator FERRIS—No private money coming into the rail system. In other words,would you allow the governments of the day—state or federal—to continue to run thesystem as they have?

Mr Longfellow —As I said previously, Senator Ferris, I believe that National Railcan be competitive. Just because you privatise something does not mean it is going to beeffective.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Hear! Hear!

Mr Longfellow —As I said earlier, slash and burn is privatisation because theyhave to make a profit to succeed or to continue. National Rail, as it is, we know is losingmoney. That is why I am saying go to the top of the tree. They are the ones who havemade this awful mess of National Rail; nobody else, and they have been allowed tocontinue to do it. Start up there and seek answers of why.

It is quite obvious that the costs that blew out here were suppressed. Why?Somebody in management has done the wrong thing. And privatising is not—and Ireiterate, not—going to rectify it, apart from them going to say, ‘Look, there’s not enoughbums on seats coming on that railway service to continue on this western line. We willsend it round through Melbourne.’ Where does that leave our western community? Lost. Iknow we are this side of the Blue Mountains and I am afraid that is where a lot ofpoliticians seem to think the whole lot ends. This is a big world out here and Australia isa big place as well you are aware.

Senator FERRIS—Thank you.

CHAIR —Mr Longfellow, I add the thanks of the committee that we have given tothe other witnesses here today to you as well. I think we have begun to feel something ofthe pain you are feeling. As I said to the other witnesses, most of the people on thiscommittee are committed to regional Australia, and we cannot say that for all the senators.We will certainly be doing our best to respond, not just to the bare bones of the evidenceyou have given but to the spirit that has been expressed which we felt.

There may be some other evidence that you would like to supply to us, some ofthe statistics and so on, and we would be happy to receive that. There may be somefurther questions we could put to you in writing. Thank you very much for appearing.

Mr Longfellow —Not a problem. Thank you.



CHAIR —We now have an open forum and we have a number of speakers. We aresuggesting three minutes but we will not be too strict on that, as long as you do not takemore than five.

Mr Beckroge—I have held the seat of Broken Hill since 1981. The electorate Icover covers about 41 per cent of New South Wales and certainly the railway line thatruns through it from Uabelong West virtually to the border is a vital life line.

The reason why you people are here today is because the government changed inMarch last year. The reason why we have this problem is because of their ideologicalconcerns about issues. It is my belief that you have to come up with some way ofameliorating that condition and I wish you well.

You have heard today from people in Broken Hill who have expressed to you inthe clearest possible terms the effects that such a decision to threaten the existence of theline. As you know, people in Broken Hill and elsewhere believe that privatisation equalsthreatening that future. Whether that is valid or not is beside the point.

What is to the point is that Australia is a huge country with very few people and asmall base of investment capital. We have a large country that we should be thinking ofservicing and not selling off. I believe that in terms so the Indian Pacific and its role, it isimportant to see it not only in terms of a tourist train which it has been, but as acommuter, and you have had evidence of that today so I will not go into that.

The interesting part about AN is that in the last year to 18 months it has gonethrough changes in management; there has been a refurbishment of the train. There hasbeen a five-year marketing plan put together for it and there was a whole lot of excitementand interest about revamping it to make it payable.

Obviously, there has been a joke and I take a point that a lot of people are non-paying, including the politicians who travel on it. It has been a bit of a joke thatsomebody saw a waiter walking down the corridor with a bottle of champagne on a silvertray and someone said, ‘Who is that for?’ and he said, ‘It is the full paying customer wehave got’. But that is not the fault of government or privatisation, that is the fault of themanagement of the show. There is no reason to say that the privatised managers are goingto do any better.

What has happened, as Ray Longfellow said, is that you have an organisation thatis not operating properly. If Senator Calvert and the other Liberal senator wished to blamethe previous government, so be it. But, as Senator Collins says, we are here in 1997 andwe have to find a way of operating in the future. The Senate’s task is surely to representall of regional Australia. The Senate obviously was set up to provide protection from theVictorias and New South Waleses, who had the numbers. I say to Senator Calvert thatTasmania was put on an equal basis in the constitution. It was given an equal number of



senators. I am not against that. As someone who comes from a regional area and who isvery much worried about its future, I wish you well with Tasmania and everything thatyou can get out of the Commonwealth.

I might also add that I have been to Darwin recently and there would be nothingbetter in Australia than having a railway line built from Alice Springs to Darwin. That isthe way we should be thinking. Your committee, with great respect, should berecommending to the government that even if it is privatised, even if they wish to pursuethat—and, as you know, the reality in the Senate is that they can pursue it if theyconvince those Labor rats to actually vote with them again; they did it with Telstra andgot a deal.

Certainly the gentleman from Tasmania got a deal to ameliorate the condition inTasmania. So I do not see why you cannot, in all fairness, suggest to the government that,if there is privatisation, they retain a golden share, if you like, a particular remaininginterest, in the line. One of the things that you should suggest to the government,respectively I put, is that you require the government to hold one share and that share is agolden share. They could then require pensioner travel to be provided for by the company.Basically, the company that takes over this will get it for virtually nothing. It will be a firesale. There will be no debts—nothing at all. They will walk in and take over. There is acapacity for whoever takes over this to provide the services they provide. Of course, weput to you that it should be run through Broken Hill. There would be the two servicesfrom AN running through Broken Hill.

Finally, the mayor raised the matter of the outback adventurer train the New SouthWales government has put on. That has been returned to the service. The same train doesanother trip from Sydney to Griffith. It has been very well patronised in both areas.Putting it on cost the budget $3 million. The Broken Hill journey is about 60 per cent full,but there has been a lot of promotion of it. It has been heavily promoted; money has beenspent on promoting it. So I think that a new AN—a corporatised body; not a privatisedbody—could provide the service that we have all been used to and improve it in thefuture. Thank you.

Mr Arnold —I own Broken Hill Cockatoo Tours, which is a tourist coachoperation. In the last few years the number of people who have travelled by rail to BrokenHill and taken my tours has been usually fifty-fifty—that is, half have been full payingcustomers and the other half have been pensioners. Although they do not pay, each yearthey get their full rail passes in New South Wales. When they book my tour, the railwaytakes 20 per cent commission of that sale. So they are really not travelling for nothing.The railway is getting something for it.

CHAIR —And they pay full fare with you?

Mr Arnold —Yes, because I operate on the cheapest possible fare. Not being



discriminative, a millionaire gets the same price as a pensioner. If these railways were runas I run my business they would be showing a profit, but the reason they do not show aprofit is that they are not marketed. Out in this area, if a snake is giving you trouble youcut its head off and you do not have that problem with it anymore. It is up the top that therailways are not showing their profits.

We run a daily coach XPT service from Broken Hill to Sydney but it leaves at4.10 a.m. The quickest way to take a service off the market is put it at a time when no-one wants to get up and travel on it and say it is not working. There is no reason why thatservice cannot leave Broken Hill at 7 a.m. and they run their trains to coincide with thatservice and it arrives in Sydney at the same time that the bus would arrive in Broken Hill.There is no reason why they cannot leave at the same time in Sydney and arrive back inBroken Hill. They just run two services that cross over. If you are marketing tourism, thatis the way it has to be marketed. People do not want to travel in the night. They want tosit up in the day, be comfortable and see the countryside.

I have travelled on the Indian Pacific quite a few times. Senator Collins, have youbeen on the Indian Pacific?

Senator BOB COLLINS—No.

Mr Arnold —Even if we travel first class, when we go to the dining room you andI would have to sit on two milk crates in the aisle to have our meals. There would be atleast eight people in this room, including myself, who cannot fit in behind the tables.

Senator BOB COLLINS—I did notice a certain family resemblance there, MrArnold!

Mr Arnold —I have taken five stone off but I still cannot fit in behind a table. Foroverseas travellers, with most of their trains the chairs move. If you are robust you canmove the chair back from the table—

Senator BOB COLLINS—That is a word I like, ‘robust’!

Mr Arnold —The other thing is in the marketing.

Senator BOB COLLINS—Good government needs men of substance, that is whatI always say.

Mr Arnold —They have not got the experienced people marketing the productbecause if they had it would not be running at a loss. If I walk into Sydney railway stationand I ask, ‘What information do you have on Broken Hill?’, they say, ‘What do you wantto go there for?’ They should be saying, ‘This is what we have. This is the price’. Theyshould be thinking, ‘We are going to get 20 per cent of this.’



That is their thinking. They come out with a university degree. They go into a topjob. They are earning 10 times the amount of money I am. I have been in the touristcoach business for 15 years yet in October I have to go to Sydney to the university and doa coach management course. Have you ever heard of anything more ridiculous?

Senator BOB COLLINS—That is pretty silly.

Mr Arnold —If I could not run a business—

Senator BOB COLLINS—Have you successfully survived in the business for 15years?

Mr Arnold —Yes.

Senator BOB COLLINS—I would have thought that was a reasonablequalification.

Mr Arnold —I thought so too.

CHAIR —Can you begin to wind up, Mr Arnold.

Mr Arnold —Whether it is run by the government or privatisation they have tolook at marketing the product to the public because over the next 10 years we are going tohave something like 10 million people retiring. They have done their overseas bit whenthey were young and now they want to have a look at Australia. This is the story I amgetting from my customers. What they like is a nice comfortable train that they can sit inand get from point A to point B at the cheapest cost.

Mercedes Benz make 80-seat passenger rail cars that are cheap to run. You needone operator, the bloke driving it. He can drive his hours. These are only a couple ofhundred thousand dollars each. The cost of running a train through Broken Hill to Perth,and if you had step offs where they could spend one or two days in the area and then getback on, like they do in Europe, it is a marketable proposition. However, they do not dothat. It is up the top. Thank you.

CHAIR —Mr Arnold, if you could stay back we would love to talk to you aboutthe 20 per cent commission you pay. However, I have said we would not have questionsand I think we need to stick to that otherwise it is not fair to other people.

Mr Arnold —No, I am aware of that.

CHAIR —Thank you very much, Mr Arnold. Mr Miller?

Mr Miller —I have been with the railways for 30 years. I have seen a lot of



governments come and go. I have seen infrastructure fall apart. I have seen how the IndianPacific is run. I have seen how the freight services are run. If it had been left alone withAustralian National, they would have been making money. They were making money, theywould have been making a lot of money by now and they would have probably increasedtheir passenger services and their patronage too. Unfortunately, they always find theseobstacles in their road and, of course, out of this was born the National Rail Corporation.Unfortunately, they have lost most of the freight back to the roads and they are losingmoney like steam. They are not pleasant people to work for. I cannot see a future forNational Rail.

The Indian Pacific’s route depends on what National Rail freight can be carted onthese western lines, southern lines or anywhere else. They will never compete with roadtransport simply because the infrastructure in the railways does not allow them to do that.They will not compete with the roads unless governments and businesses together believethat the future in railways is with new routes. New routes have to be established. We arerunning on 100-year-old systems that are just not applicable to move freight aroundanymore.

To move freight out of Queensland you have to go right down through New SouthWales. The National Rail Corporation wants to run their freight that way; they do notwant to be involved with regional centres anymore. They believe Brisbane, Sydney,Melbourne, Adelaide and Perth are the only places that should be serviced by the NationalRail Corporation. With any regional freight passenger trains that happen to be in the way,it is ‘Damn them. We don’t care about them. We don’t care if they damn well run or not.’That is not the way to treat Australians.

Believe it or not, I thought the reason we had a line across western New SouthWales into South Australia was that the ships would take too long to get around thebottom of the Australian continent to be able to move goods and services. The NationalRail Corporation have taken a backward step. They want to run freight right down the eastcoast, right through Victoria and Adelaide and right round to Perth and back again andbugger the rest of them. We have increasing populations in places like Dubbo, Orange,Bathurst and even Broken Hill. We have railway lines there at present and these peoplewill need to be serviced in 50, 60 or 100 years time. What are we going to do? Are wegoing to dig up the railway and go back to roads? We cannot afford it. These are centresthat will grow populations to 500,000 people, and they have railways there at the momentand they are not being used.

I think a little bit of vision of the future by politicians or statesmen, if we haveany, would be applicable. I think it would be to the benefit of all Australians. At present,until something concrete is done with the National Rail Corporation with regard to freight,I cannot see Australia benefiting until the private sector and government have more inputand new routes are formed. Certainly with the formation of new routes would come newpassenger services which would allow people to travel across Australia in different



directions from the capital cities of Melbourne, Brisbane and Sydney. These are things thathave not been thought of. Perhaps it is time that we got to the planning stage, not just themoney stage.

You can feel for the people of Ivanhoe, Parkes or any of these other regionalcentres like Broken Hill that are serviced by the Indian Pacific. It is the only train wehave other than the Outback Explorer. People came from miles around to have a look atthe Outback Explorer when it was first serviced because it was something new, and peoplereally love something new. They also love a service. Thank you very much.

CHAIR —Thank you, Mr Miller.

Mr Curtis —I am a resident of Broken Hill and interested in the railway scene,locally and also nationally. Let me say at the beginning that I thought it was disgustingthe way Australian National railways had its main income earning arm cut off in the formof National Rail and was still expected to survive. There was no way it could. If yourincome is cut off, you cannot survive. You still have to live and you still have to providethe services, for example, to your family. Australian National’s family is South Australiaand Tasmania. They cannot provide services without income. It was one of the fewrailways that turned a profit until National Rail came into being and took that moneyaway, which challenges Senator Ferris and Senator Calvert.

Government railways can turn a profit. Queensland Rail turns profits now, althoughit is spending a lot on infrastructure. But now in the year of small government it lookslike it needs to be sold off. Roads will bear the brunt of that. Is the government preparedto pour a lot more money into roads if services are cut, grain services in South Australiaespecially, because they do not pay? A lot more traffic will travel by road, and thegovernment will have to fork out money for that. It is more expensive to maintain roadsthan it is to maintain railways, but the users do not pay for roads. With more trucks on theroads, the roads become more dangerous. Is the government prepared to face up to the factthat we will have even higher death tolls on the roads because there are more accidentsinvolving trucks?

If it is sold off, it needs to be sold off as one unit so that it can cross-subsidise itsoperations. Some of its operations do not make a profit; some do. So it needs to be able tocross-subsidise such that it can support its entire operation.

It also needs a subsidy from the government to ensure that pensioners can stilltravel free. Pensioners, especially in Broken Hill, are big tourist people. They are the oneswho have the time to spend exploring these far reaches of Australia, and they are the oneswho come here, free, and enjoy their stay with the courtesy we extend here in BrokenHill. Without that free trip, many of them would just not bother coming because it is along way. If Australian National is sold, could the government please keep the subsidy forpensioners? Tourists are becoming Broken Hill’s lifeblood more and more so. The mines



are diminishing, as has been said here today.

There is a growing concern also about the environment and greenhouse gasemissions around Australia. Rail is a terrific option for reducing greenhouse emissions.Rail is very fuel efficient. It has a one-third rolling resistance of steel rail to a steel tyre ascompared with a rubber tyre to a bitumen road. Therefore, it is a lot more efficient.Greenhouse gas emissions from rail are a lot lower than that from road transport. It wouldbe good for the government to encourage that more. With careful investment, carefulmanagement and careful promotion, the government could achieve that.

It could be a profitable option for the government; it could also be a profitableoption for private enterprise. But the government needs to regulate the entiretransport industry, because at the moment it is heading towards free reign and it will justspin into a monster that the government will have to pay for anyway. It needs moreregulation for other forms of transport as well.

Would it be possible to have the government and private companies working overthe same routes together rather than having purely a private Australian National? Take, forexample, the New South Wales model that is just being set up. The state government isstill running rail services, especially passenger services and freight services, but they haveset up something like a roads and traffic authority that is responsible for the railways andallows private operators to use the same lines as the government body railways. Could itjust be possible that that set-up could be used on Australian National railway lines?

In closing, the government needs to tread very carefully on the current path it istaking. Currently, Broken Hill is bruised, it is very tender and it has been the brunt of toomany cuts in jobs, funding and government services. Please, do not let down the people ofBroken Hill by allowing a private company to take away services.

Senator FERRIS—Mr Chairman, could I just make a point. During the morningtea break, Mr Curtis approached me, purporting to be a journalist, and asked me aquestion whilst holding a tape recorder. I think the committee should know whether MrCurtis is in fact a journalist or, if he is not, on what basis he approached me as a memberof this committee and asked questions.

Mr Curtis —I am a part-time journalist. This is aside from that job. I have beenreporting on this, but I am also here as an interested member of the public.

CHAIR —Thank you.

Mr Dansie—I was a candidate at the last state election, competing against BillBeckroge in the state election. I also competed against his worship, the mayor, in 1990 forthe federal elections. In that time I tried to find the figures to compare road with rail.Finding the figures for the cost of building a road was very easy—a 24-hour waiting



period. The figures were available in black and white—I think Mr Beckroge has a copy ofthem in his office—of what it cost to build the road between Broken Hill and Coburn.

On the other hand, it was very hard—in fact, impossible—to get any realinformation on railway. I got a cost for the laying of track and the cost of maintenance peryear. All the other figures I could get by a roundabout way. It took me about 18 months.The result was that, basically, it cost at least twice as much to build a road as it did tobuild rail and rail handled twice the freight at approximately the same maintenance cost.So it meant that rail really was miles in front in relation to building and operating it.

I will not go into the details. You can approach me afterwards about particularfigures, if you want to, and I can give you the breakdown of what I came up with. But thevery interesting conclusion I came to was that, if the freight operators that use our roadshad to actually build the roads they run on—

Senator BOB COLLINS—Or pay for them.

Mr Dansie—That is right; pay the cost of running a road—they could run abloody railway.

Senator BOB COLLINS—That is correct.

Mr Dansie—That is the simple bottom line. ANR came out with figures relating tothe cost of providing the rail for private operators to operate on. By my reckoning it was2½ per cent of the cost of the damage done to roads. How are they going to make moneywhen trucks do $40 damage to the roads and the railways reckon they do only $1damage? There will be nothing left of the roads in a few years time because they will notbe able to maintain them—just impossible! The figures are being deliberately fudged tosomehow get rid of our rail structure. Has an overseas takeover of Australia or what haveyou been planned? Someone somewhere is fudging all of the figures to make rail look sobad. If they are going to charge private companies for operating their trains on therailways, why in the hell don’t they charge private companies operating on the roads forthe cost of maintaining roads? Then you would see everything go by train.

In conclusion, as far as I am concerned, they can have the bloody Indian Pacific inMelbourne. What we need is a daily train service between Sydney and Adelaide thatpeople can get off wherever they like and for as long as they like so that they can taketwo weeks to get from one point to the other. That then would put tourists into places likeMenindee and Ivanhoe. All the little centres would get these tourists staying at theirplaces. The pub costs only $5 a night and it is as good as one anywhere else.

CHAIR —Which one?

Mr Dansie—At Ivanhoe. During the 1990 campaign I actually stayed there and the



bed was as comfortable as the one I have at home. They do not really realise the value ofmoney. With a few tourists I think they might. Their costs might go up.

I worked out another little point which is of great interest: if they built the roadwayparallel to the railway line through Parkes, they would save 10 per cent of the distancethey have. They should have built the railway like they intended—along where the road isto Wilcannia, Cobar and through Dubbo. That would give them direct access to the Gap,as it is colloquially known. It is the only natural path through the whole of the BlueMountains. This is where the majority of our trains now go. They do not go from Parkesup through Orange, Dubbo and Lithgow; they go through the Gap. But there is about 60kilometres of line that has got to be built and they cannot build it. They do not have themoney.

CHAIR —Thank you very much, Mr Dansie. That concludes the hearings. Acouple of senators might like to talk to a couple of people, and that is very appropriate.Let me reiterate that we are very grateful to Broken Hill. This has certainly expanded myknowledge of the whole issue. I have spent a lot of time, many years, in inland Australia,so I know what you are talking about in terms of people living somewhere else making allthe decisions. So thank you again. It has been great to be here. I declare the hearingclosed.

Committee adjourned at 12.43 p.m.


SENATE - Parliament of Australia filethree- to five-minute statement with no questions. If there are...

Documents

Transcript of SENATE - Parliament of Australia filethree- to five-minute statement with no questions. If there are...