Mr McCARTHY - 1998-04-21
The existing Cox Peninsula ferry service comes under strong criticism from Mandorah residents for its cost and unreliability. They have recently held public meetings to voice their concerns. I am aware that the government is actively examining the future of the service. When will the government take action to ensure that a ferry service of an acceptable standard is in place for the residents of Cox Peninsula?
Mr Bailey: Your mates in Canberra shut down Radio Australia. That is the biggest problem.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, it is not the only problem. I remember the ferry service to Mandorah coming into question as long ago as 1980 when Radio Australia was in full flight. I do not think that is a fair comment. It did not help in terms of the number of people travelling backwards and forwards. It involved only 2 trips, of course, one to go across and one to return.
The problem seems to be that everybody believes that they are able to run a ferry service. Plentiful services are supplied at peak times, largely during the tourist season. The operators drop their prices to get into the marketplace and, as soon as the tourist season ends, they drop out of the marketplace. That leaves one operator who has to try to get through the hard times.
I have given this matter deep consideration. In fact, officers of my department have spent a great deal of time assessing the viability of the existing ferry service and listening to Mandorah residents. Treasury has provided a great deal of assistance in trying to evaluate what subsidy would be required to enable the provision of a decent operation. It should be remembered that we provide subsidies for bus services and every other form of public transport. Indeed, the Grants Commission recognises that public transportation needs to be subsidised in one way or another. As a result of those considerations, the government has decided that it will call for public tenders for a new ferry service to begin operation at the start of next year. There is some criticism of that delay but, if we put that contract up tomorrow, the current operator would be in a very beneficial position to tender for it, having a boat up and running and being there. On the other hand, if
Page 175
we wait for 6 months, that will allow other people to examine the situation and obtain options on boats etc to enable them to put in a fair-dinkum tender.
Under the terms of the contract, an exclusive licence will be awarded to the successful tenderer in accordance with part 5 of the Marine Act. That is no different from our making a regular passenger transport (RPT) arrangement with an airline and giving the operator exclusivity in running that particular service. We cannot have people going in and out of the marketplace from time to time, creating confusion as fairweather operators. That behaviour has caused many of the problems that we have been experiencing.
It is against CLP policy to set up a monopoly situation of that kind but, in this case, we consider that very few other options are available to us. There is extensive criticism of that too - for example, from the people at the hotel at Mandorah. If the ferry does not leave at 10 pm or midnight or 1 am, the hotel management says that it will lose patronage. It wants to run a ferry service itself. It can do that, but it cannot advertise it as a regular ferry service. That is something that will have to be worked out with other people there who want that type of service. Part 5 of the Marine Act provides the only fair and reasonable way to address the issue and guarantee a reliable service for commuters. I am convinced of that.
I understand there are many potential ferry operators who may come under consideration. They will have the opportunity to tender on an open and competitive basis. No doubt the field will include the current operator who has been running the service under some difficulties during the recent wet season and who seems be the target of many complaints from ferry users. Those complaints centre mainly on the number and frequency of ferry runs across the harbour. Indeed, a public meeting was held on 15 April and I understand another was to be held last Sunday night.
Some residents have been asking why the government has to be involved in this at all. An option being considered is for the government not to be involved and not to have a restrictive tender process. Subject to the feelings of the people of Mandorah, tenders are expected to be advertised next month and a contract awarded in July. It could be argued that launching a new service immediately the contract is awarded in July would strongly favour the current operator who obviously has the boats and the staff in place. In the intervening period, between July and next year, Dennis Tovey has agreed to continue his Mandorah jet shuttle service. Obviously, the successful tenderer will have to offer a regular and reliable service to meet the conditions of the tender. In this regard, we ill be taking close account of the views of the Mandorah residents and ferry users.
This was a very good question from the honourable member. It probably does not require a ministerial statement, but considerable anguish has been created over people needing medical treatment. Everyone knows that the urban development of Darwin will extend to the peninsula. It is a very nice place to live.
Mr Bailey: Build a bridge.
Mr COULTER: We have advocated that. The bridge to Mandorah may appear in this year's budget. I look forward with interest to the budget next Tuesday. That may solve the problem of needing to run a ferry service to Cox Peninsula at all.
Page 176
Mr Bailey: Your mates in Canberra shut down Radio Australia. That is the biggest problem.
ANSWER
Madam Speaker, it is not the only problem. I remember the ferry service to Mandorah coming into question as long ago as 1980 when Radio Australia was in full flight. I do not think that is a fair comment. It did not help in terms of the number of people travelling backwards and forwards. It involved only 2 trips, of course, one to go across and one to return.
The problem seems to be that everybody believes that they are able to run a ferry service. Plentiful services are supplied at peak times, largely during the tourist season. The operators drop their prices to get into the marketplace and, as soon as the tourist season ends, they drop out of the marketplace. That leaves one operator who has to try to get through the hard times.
I have given this matter deep consideration. In fact, officers of my department have spent a great deal of time assessing the viability of the existing ferry service and listening to Mandorah residents. Treasury has provided a great deal of assistance in trying to evaluate what subsidy would be required to enable the provision of a decent operation. It should be remembered that we provide subsidies for bus services and every other form of public transport. Indeed, the Grants Commission recognises that public transportation needs to be subsidised in one way or another. As a result of those considerations, the government has decided that it will call for public tenders for a new ferry service to begin operation at the start of next year. There is some criticism of that delay but, if we put that contract up tomorrow, the current operator would be in a very beneficial position to tender for it, having a boat up and running and being there. On the other hand, if
Page 175
we wait for 6 months, that will allow other people to examine the situation and obtain options on boats etc to enable them to put in a fair-dinkum tender.
Under the terms of the contract, an exclusive licence will be awarded to the successful tenderer in accordance with part 5 of the Marine Act. That is no different from our making a regular passenger transport (RPT) arrangement with an airline and giving the operator exclusivity in running that particular service. We cannot have people going in and out of the marketplace from time to time, creating confusion as fairweather operators. That behaviour has caused many of the problems that we have been experiencing.
It is against CLP policy to set up a monopoly situation of that kind but, in this case, we consider that very few other options are available to us. There is extensive criticism of that too - for example, from the people at the hotel at Mandorah. If the ferry does not leave at 10 pm or midnight or 1 am, the hotel management says that it will lose patronage. It wants to run a ferry service itself. It can do that, but it cannot advertise it as a regular ferry service. That is something that will have to be worked out with other people there who want that type of service. Part 5 of the Marine Act provides the only fair and reasonable way to address the issue and guarantee a reliable service for commuters. I am convinced of that.
I understand there are many potential ferry operators who may come under consideration. They will have the opportunity to tender on an open and competitive basis. No doubt the field will include the current operator who has been running the service under some difficulties during the recent wet season and who seems be the target of many complaints from ferry users. Those complaints centre mainly on the number and frequency of ferry runs across the harbour. Indeed, a public meeting was held on 15 April and I understand another was to be held last Sunday night.
Some residents have been asking why the government has to be involved in this at all. An option being considered is for the government not to be involved and not to have a restrictive tender process. Subject to the feelings of the people of Mandorah, tenders are expected to be advertised next month and a contract awarded in July. It could be argued that launching a new service immediately the contract is awarded in July would strongly favour the current operator who obviously has the boats and the staff in place. In the intervening period, between July and next year, Dennis Tovey has agreed to continue his Mandorah jet shuttle service. Obviously, the successful tenderer will have to offer a regular and reliable service to meet the conditions of the tender. In this regard, we ill be taking close account of the views of the Mandorah residents and ferry users.
This was a very good question from the honourable member. It probably does not require a ministerial statement, but considerable anguish has been created over people needing medical treatment. Everyone knows that the urban development of Darwin will extend to the peninsula. It is a very nice place to live.
Mr Bailey: Build a bridge.
Mr COULTER: We have advocated that. The bridge to Mandorah may appear in this year's budget. I look forward with interest to the budget next Tuesday. That may solve the problem of needing to run a ferry service to Cox Peninsula at all.
Page 176
Last updated: 09 Aug 2016