Re: 7-30 report on fuel excise

["Michael Walker" <walker@hotkey.net.au>]

Andrew Honan wrote in message <7c8840$u29$1@the-fly.zip.com.au>...
>You raise some interesting points concerning diesel fuel excise.
>I believe that the trucking industry should pay a greenhouse (or carbon
tax)
>and not receive a reduction in diesel fuel excise. The trucking industry is
>getting a free kick by not properly paying road usage charges as well as
>receiving diesel fuel excise rebates.
>
>I don't believe that spending nothing on rail infrastructure is viable. The
>rail infrastructure is already in a very poor state and needs investment to
>make it competitive (along with logistics and operations).
>There has to be some micro economic stimulus (tax breaks) by government for
>rail to be given a chance. I think bodies such as the ACCC and IPART view
>access fees. they would probably view access feesin terms of fair
>competition to rail operators (trying to get access to the infrastructure)
>and infrastructure cost recovery.
>
Maybe then we should create a level playing field (TM by last Labour Govt
and supported by current one) and charge truck and bus drivers road access
fees based per km (can be done using odometer readings - tampering with
these is usually able to be picked up by observation and is highly illegal)
then spend nothing on roads. This would put road freight carriers on an
equal footing with rail. What's that? Can't hear you above the squealing and
shouts of unfair from the government's-mates in the trucking industry,
effective road lobbying groups and motorists who claim we need all those
trucks to give us a scare once in a while - keeps us awake you know! Of
course, I personally don't believe for a minute Jeff has all those mates in
the bus industry who he needs to support (why do buses carry people along
Nightrider routes designed to emulate train lines - wouldn't trains be able
to do it?)...