Wednesday, 3 June 2026

 Katherine COPSEY (Southern Metropolitan) (15:55): I move:

That this house notes that:

(1)   in a cost-of-living crisis, free public transport has been good for Victoria;

(2)   Victoria still needs significant public transport improvements, including in outer suburban areas and regional Victoria;

(3)   these improvements could be funded by taxing the major banks and big corporations;

and calls on the government to make public transport permanently free and frequent.

I am here this afternoon to mourn the loss of free public transport in Victoria. It has been a glorious couple of months, and it has been so good for Victoria to enjoy free public transport. We were so pleased to see the government take up this idea, which has saved Victorians so much money during a period when we have been facing a fuel crisis – which I note is ongoing – and a cost-of-living crisis which is ongoing.

When Trump and Netanyahu’s illegal strikes on Iran first sent petrol and diesel prices through the roof, the Greens did call on the government to make public transport free for the month of April and to use that month to start implementing the longer term fixes that would help more people access those free fares and avoid paying a fortune at the petrol pump – and to run trains and trams more frequently at off peak times, when there is plenty of travel demand and plenty of capacity on the tracks but services are currently much less frequent. We called on them to reform the bus network into a grid of frequent routes that serves everyone in established suburbs and growth corridors in Melbourne and in regional Victoria. We called on them to roll out more safe cycling infrastructure to enable more people to leave the car at home and ride their bike instead and to support the switch from petrol and diesel cars to electric vehicles, which we know are cheaper to run at the best of times but especially so during a fuel crisis. We were so pleased that the government saw sense in the suggestion and agreed to make public transport free for April, and since then we have actually seen over the period of time that we have had free PT available in Victoria passenger numbers returning to pre-COVID levels, which is fantastic. April was the busiest month in more than six years, and there was a more than doubling of V/Line passenger numbers on the weekends. It has been a huge success story for Victoria, and that is why we are putting this motion today, calling on the government to keep public transport permanently free and frequent in Victoria.

Those who could access free public transport have been able to save a lot of money over this period, which has been a welcome relief in a time where those high petrol and diesel prices have just been adding to and compounding the ongoing cost-of-living crisis Victorians have been facing for years now. For those who are already taking public transport the ability to leave the Myki at home represented a saving of $220 a month, and for someone who was switching from a car to commuting by public transport those savings would have been even higher. Based on the RACV’s Car Running Costs 2022 report, a middle-of-the-range Subaru Forester would cost about $250 a month on average in fuel, servicing and tyres, and that is just in normal times. With petrol surging 30 per cent recently, it could have been more like a $300 saving to leave the car in the garage for a month. This is a real cost-of-living success story – real relief delivered to the Victorian community as well as all of the emissions reductions and congestion-busting benefits that have flowed from this initiative.

The success of this initiative, though, has actually also highlighted a number of areas that we really know illustrate need for further improvement. There are failures that have been ongoing in PT, and the period of free transport has actually brought a lot of discussion around community need to the fore. For so many people across the state, switching a car trip to a public transport trip actually still is not an option. Some are living in housing estates that, several years after people have moved in, do not even have a bus available. Some live in well-established suburbs that do have buses, but they run in meandering patterns through the back streets, not taking direct routes to where people want to get to. And some have services that, for example, only run once an hour or do not run late enough into the evenings, or even do not have a service at all, particularly during weekend periods. The failure to provide alternatives to driving has locked so many Victorians into car dependence, and in some households multiple car dependence, with all of the costs that come with that.

This was an issue well before the current fuel crisis, forcing families to own, insure, service and fuel multiple cars just to get around and meet their basic needs, which as we have said, is expensive at the best of times and even worse at the moment. This is without mentioning the way that car dependence locks communities into traffic congestion and into planet-wrecking carbon emissions. We know that emissions from transport are the fastest growing source of emissions in Victoria, and there is all of the pollution that flows from car dependence as well, with localised particulates and noxious gases that can have an impact on people’s lung health and contribute to rates of things like childhood asthma.

Public transport is an essential service, just like health care, just like education and just like our emergency services. Just as the COVID crisis highlighted longstanding failures and gaps in our public health system, this fuel shock has brought to the surface the areas that we really still need to address – the systemic failures of government after government to provide these growth suburbs and regions with essential public transport services. Some Victorians have even seen their experience get worse over these last few months. Particularly on V/Line, we have seen trains, that prior to the free travel period were already just barely coping with passenger numbers, reach the point of overflowing, with more demand from passengers but no more supply of services from the government. In many cases, this was actually completely predictable and foreseeable. In Melbourne’s west, V/Line trains have been pulling double duty on the Ballarat line, serving regional passengers as well as suburban passengers, and that has caused ongoing issues with crowding. Regional and suburban passengers and councils and advocacy groups have already been raising the alarm about this and crying out for years for the line to be electrified to Melton to ease the pressure, but the government still keeps kicking the can down the road, delaying this project year after year. We have now seen some commitment only to feasibility and planning. Really, that project has been in the works for years and years. It is time to get on with it.

David Ettershank interjected.

Katherine COPSEY: 13 years, Mr Ettershank, not that anyone was counting. We see that this is a story that is repeated, unfortunately, across our regions – places like Wyndham Vale and Donnybrook, growth suburbs all around Melbourne that have been shouting for years and in some cases decades about the need for metro trains to be extended and electrified, but the government has failed to listen to those calls. April saw that pot that has been simmering boil over, with already crowded trains becoming so full that people were left behind on the platform. I had a personal experience of this on like the first, third, second day of the public transport free period where a bus wonderfully went sailing past saying, ‘Sorry, bus full.’ I raised with the minister the question of how we were capturing the data during the period that we had free public transport. We know what passenger numbers are from our regular passenger data, but the unmet demand for people who have been left stranded at the stops – I do not know if we will ever have an accurate picture of what that was during this period.

It is also worth acknowledging that the government has made really positive announcements during this period about public transport services, which are very welcome, and this year’s budget included an upgrade from 30- to 20-minute frequencies on the Belgrave, Lilydale and Glen Waverley lines on weekday evenings and similar upgrades on the Mernda and Hurstbridge lines on weekends as well as delivering the nine trains a day that the recently completed Shepparton line upgrade enabled. It also included a smattering of upgrades to individual bus routes. These upgrades are incredibly welcome and answer community demands that have been loudly voiced for many, many years, but they still fall well short of the transformative change we need to see if we are going to seriously reduce car dependence in this state, reduce people’s fuel bills and reduce our transport emissions quickly enough to meet our state’s own emissions reduction goals. Business-as-usual tinkering will not meet the moment here. There is so much work to do, and even in this moment of an actual fuel crisis, I feel the government is not responding to the ‘crisitunity’ that it presents. There is so much work to do, and while it is welcome that this temporary fix has been put in place by the government, we need to be making those systemic investments with a sense of urgency.

The lack of urgency is unfortunately familiar when it comes to getting transport up to scratch, because some members of our community we know live near tram services that are frequent and direct, but they still cannot access them, free or otherwise, because the government continues to fail in its legal duty to make those services accessible to people of all ages and all abilities. I have spoken before about the shame of our failure to meet the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (DDA) requirements, which required all train stations and tram stops to comply with accessibility standards by 31 December 2022. Nearly 1200 stops, about three-quarters of the network, still do not meet these standards. It is just a shame. At the end of the last year this government was patting itself on the back for having built 100 level access tram stops. But that is over about 11 years in office, and that is an average of maybe just over nine a year – come on, guys. At that rate it is going to take us more than a century to upgrade all 1200. It is just not okay for folks of different abilities, who have been campaigning for key routes to be made accessible for years and years, election after election, to be waiting for commitments to be realised, and they are still waiting.

Worst of all, this government is actively now building more noncompliant stops. There is an example currently of consolidating multiple tram stops in the North Melbourne area to cope with the longer G-class trams. But when the government is building these new stops, they will still be at ground level. They are brand new stops to serve brand new accessible trams, but they will not be providing level boarding opportunities for people accessing tram routes in this area. These are not old stops that are awaiting upgrade. These are new stops that are being done in different locations that do not meet modern standards. I think that is appalling.

I do not understand why accessibility has not been incorporated as a business-as-usual requirement. It is not just for folks in wheelchairs and those with pushers; accessible trams help all of us. Platform stops are obviously crucial for people who are relying on wheelchairs or mobility scooters to get around, but they are also important for people who can walk but have difficulty taking large steps up or down. They are a huge help to people pushing prams or carrying heavy bags or just heading to the market with their trolley, and they provide a huge safety benefit by protecting passengers from passing cars, which is something that I still to this day have issues with. Even in Melbourne, a place where we are all very used to trams, you still get times in traffic when a car will speed past and it is just not safe. Platform stops reduce that risk to pedestrians. They can also help us all and they can help the tram network run faster and more reliably by reducing dwell times at stops, because people can get on and off more quickly and easily. We have got these upgrades that are not only legally required by the DDA, not only crucial for people with disabilities to get around with independence and dignity, but also hugely beneficial for the wider travelling public, and still the government cannot bring itself to implement them with urgency. Honestly, we are so far behind where we should be. We have got ground to make up.

As the end of April approached and it became clear that the Strait of Hormuz crisis would be keeping petrol and diesel prices high for the foreseeable future, we called on the government to make free public transport permanent. Other states are not walking away from this. Tasmania have extended the life of their free public transport for a whole nother year until July 2027, and of course Queensland has 50-cent fares. I think we can take it up to the Apple Isle. I think that we should aim high in Victoria. We have got great resources here. And of course Queensland’s 50-cent fares are a permanent measure. But the government has announced that Victoria’s free public transport has come to an end at the end of May and half-price fares, somewhat cynically, are here until the end of the year – just after of course the election. It is a quintessentially Labor policy: rather than bold action to seriously address the problem, it is another half-measure designed to take the heat out of the issue for just long enough to cling on to power. And I will note that the conditions that supported the introduction of free public transport, namely the fuel crisis and the cost-of-living crisis, have not abated; they are continuing for Victorians.

One of the great things about this period of free public transport is that it has opened up this wider conversation about public transport priorities, and those who do not have adequate services and who have not been able to access free PT have quite rightly made their voices heard during this period. But some have suggested that it has to be one or the other – we can either have better PT or we can have free PT, but we cannot have both. In truth, it is actually just a question of priorities and choices. If we look in the transport budget, the massive, destructive, polluting North East Link toll road has blown its budget repeatedly, and that is a project that will not achieve its stated objectives. It will not reduce traffic – it will in fact just induce more people to drive, and it will create a tidal wave of traffic that will flow down the Eastern Freeway and slam into Hoddle Street in peak hours. But this government still chooses to spend money on it – billions of dollars in fact. What started as a $10 billion project has blown out to $16 billion and then to $26 billion. But still this government chooses to spend our public infrastructure money on it. The cost of this one poorly conceived toll road could fund free public transport in Victoria for 25 years, and the government is choosing not to do that. Outside of transport, this government is choosing to spend $395 million and counting on luxury corporate box upgrades at the grand prix for their ultra-wealthy corporate mates. Labor could instead choose to spend $245 million on duplicating the Upfield line, and they would have $150 million left to spend on running extra trains on the new tracks.

But it is not just a question of how we cut up the pie and what we choose to spend money on; it is a question of whether this state chooses to use its powers to make big corporations pay their fair share. In Victoria, there is a 15 per cent online gambling tax on the revenue made from Victorian customers, some of which goes to propping up the horseracing industry and supporting more gambling. But we could raise our tax to 25 per cent to match the ACT’s version, and we could make sure that all the revenue goes to things that would actually benefit the community. We could also double the existing tax on casino table games and increase taxes on pokies to 75 per cent, which altogether would raise nearly $2 billion a year. We could also impose a modest levy on the major banks. Australian banks are some of the most profitable in the world, and a modest 0.1 per cent quarterly levy on their Victorian liabilities would help ensure that they pay their fair share of tax and raise an extra $3 billion-plus a year. We could also double the existing state royalties on coal and gas, raising an extra roughly $80 million a year, while also providing an important price signal on these polluting fossil fuel projects.

If we tax the big corporations, the gambling corporations, the big banks and the fossil fuel industry, we can afford free public transport and so much more. Maybe we would not have to be pulling up our state’s public housing. We can afford to extend our public transport to new growth suburbs. We can afford to slash waiting times by running services more often. We can afford a transport system that is better for the environment and more affordable for everyone. That is the vision that the Greens want to see pursued in this state, and we call on the government to make the big banks and corporations pay their fair share and to take care of our community by making public transport permanently free and frequent.

 Michael GALEA (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (16:13): I appreciate the opportunity to talk on this motion, and I acknowledge Ms Copsey for raising what is certainly a very interesting topic to debate in the Parliament today. It was a fairly wideranging contribution in some moments, but it is an important thing for us to be talking about. At the outset I would also acknowledge, as Ms Copsey referred to, the significant further investments this government has recently announced, and I appreciate the acknowledgement of that. Indeed it was the state Labor government that came out with the very bold policy, in light of an emerging crisis, to provide public transport free for the state of Victoria for a month and then for a second month. With the ongoing understanding and awareness that, as has been referred to, we are in a very difficult situation with the Strait of Hormuz in the Middle East through a war that was not of any Australian government’s making – a situation that we are currently in – we do have a responsibility as governments to do everything that we can to manage those risks and do our bit to support Victorians. That is exactly why, as with last year – in fact even more so this year – this year’s state budget is a cost-of-living budget. There are ongoing half-price fares until at least the end of the year and there is a 20 per cent rebate on car and light vehicle registrations for up to two vehicles per individual as well. These are significant reforms. I will not go into other areas that we have already spoken about in previous days, but these are significant cost-of-living measures that will help and are helping Victorian families. We have seen the incredible take-up of these services and of these reforms that the government has brought in.

I do want to acknowledge that we are in a particularly unusual and a fast-changing situation, and it is because of that uncertainty that the government has decided to extend that free public transport for at least this seven-month period. Indeed we will continue to monitor and evaluate the success or otherwise of every initiative, including what the oil situation is at the end of the year, and whether a continuation or whether other approaches may need to be looked at at that time. I note of course, though, that we already do have some of the cheapest public transport in the country when it comes to long-distance travel, thanks to the regional fare cap, meaning that the cost of travel from Melbourne to Mallacoota or Mildura is the same as going from Melbourne to Malvern. It is significant indeed, and it is very important that public transport be affordable and accessible to Victorians.

Let us have a look, though, at the revenue output of this and what this proposal would actually look like. Based off extrapolations in the budget papers of the half-price public transport initiative, we are looking at an approximate annual hit to the budget of just over $950 million each and every year. It is a significant hit to the budget, and that would be something that indeed would have to be filled in from somewhere. I understand the point that Ms Copsey is trying to make, but what that would then effectively do is put public transport in competition with health services and with education services. We already do subsidise public transport services, as we rightly should, because every person on public transport means one less car on the road and more equity and access for all Victorians. The benefits from public transport are huge and certainly worth the subsidy, but having that revenue basis as well does play an important role.

It also plays an important role when you are looking at improving services, because – and Ms Copsey did touch on the argument that I was going to make here – the most effective way that we can drive that mode shift is by improving services. Certainly, we can see great benefits and indeed in lots of different cases increased patronage as a result of free public transport over the past couple of months, but that is an extraordinarily large investment for what is a reasonably modest jump in patronage. Compare that to putting that same equivalent figure into services: the resulting patronage you would see would be extraordinary. Every dollar that we can contribute will help towards that. Likewise, for every passenger that joins an existing service, the overall subsidy per passenger reduces, creating that positive cycle, that virtuous cycle of investment in public transport, driving increased patronage, driving a lower subsidy per passenger and driving more space, more budget and more revenue to fund further improved services, and that is only a good thing.

There is a case for having public transport that is certainly cheap but not necessarily free, especially when we focus on the key thing that evidence and research from Australia and from around the world, whether you look at academics like Jarrett Walker or the late Paul Mees, and from public transport experts tell you: frequency is freedom, frequency is key, and that is the way that we can unlock public transport access in our inner cities, in our suburbs and in our regions. Let me provide an example: if you live in Newbridge Boulevard in Clyde North in my electorate, a relatively recent new estate just off Clyde Road, you have got good access to Cranbourne with the 897 and the 898 – those east–west routes. You also have good access to Berwick with the Clyde Road bus, the 888 service. Currently that bus runs every hour. If you work in the thriving centre in Berwick and you live in this area of Clyde North, you can easily catch the 888 bus. But depending on what time your shift finishes, if you are then finding yourself waiting half an hour, 45 minutes or 50 minutes at a bus stop in Berwick to get home, you are probably not going to get the bus. You are probably going to drive, even if it costs you more, even if it means you spend more time in traffic. But if you take that investment in making public transport free and put that into service improvements – make it, for example, every 20 minutes – then that option becomes a lot more viable, and of course public transport is still much cheaper than driving even under normal circumstances. I am very happy to say, thanks to the investments in this year’s budget, that is exactly what is happening. The 888 service is being increased from an hourly service to a 20-minute service, so in that particular scenario you will certainly get the benefit of that frequency, which leads to that freedom to use public transport, to leave the car at home and indeed, for many households, to not need as many vehicles, which again can only be a good thing, having that freedom of choice.

There is a very strong argument for making public transport cheap. There is a very, very strong argument for improving services. But to make it free does become a more difficult question, because we are then making every single investment in public transport a competition: do we invest in an increased bus service in Clyde North or in increasing frequencies on the Belgrave line? Both are very worthwhile things to do. Do we invest in that under a free public transport scenario, when we are not going to get that increased revenue return from booming patronage as a result of the improved services? It might sound very easy to say, ‘Yes, we should do it now.’ But if you are having to make that consideration in comparison with ‘Do we improve funding for hospital services?’ or ‘Do we build this new school that we need to build?’ that is where it starts to put public transport improvements at a disadvantage and could lead to a future government deprioritising public transport service improvements at the altar of it being free.

Indeed there is a lot of work that has been done, there is a lot of work that we are very excited about and there is always more work to do, but we know that currently access to high-quality public transport is available to many Victorians but disproportionately in those inner-city suburbs of Melbourne, where we are trying to build more houses – but that was the previous debate. There is not an equity argument for providing free services to some and not to others. The focus needs to be on lifting up the access of all Victorians, particularly those in metropolitan urban areas and even town centres in regional Victoria. Lifting their access to services up – that must be the focus. And free PT may have some benefits in doing that, but it will not achieve the mode shift that we need to see. It will not do it nearly as effectively as improving services will.

I have not touched on point (3) of the motion, and I am not entirely sure of the detail or how constitutional it would be to tax the major banks and big corporations to fund this. But without going too far into the magic pudding argument, there was also a comment about the state of Tasmania. Tasmania is a beautiful state. Their bus network is not exactly what –

A member interjected.

Michael GALEA: Yes. It is not as beautiful as Victoria, but it is a beautiful state. Their bus network is not exactly what you would call expansive. It seems to be not very usable at all, even in inner-city Hobart, let alone any question of intercity bus services or rail services or trams – forget about it. I am off topic, but I believe they are looking at doing some bus reform too, so hopefully they will do some proper work in improving Hobart’s bus network. But certainly it is not an equivalent comparison when you compare it to a state like Victoria, where we have the world’s largest tram network and by far and away the most effective regional rail network in Australasia, and when you have a government currently that is making the investments in not just the rail infrastructure but the rail, tram and bus services that this growing state desperately needs.

 Evan MULHOLLAND (Northern Metropolitan) (16:23): I rise to speak on Ms Copsey’s motion. It is quite an interesting motion for today, but it is a Wednesday, so you often get interesting debates going on in this chamber, and I am not one to miss interesting debates. It is on the issue of public transport, and over the last 12 years my electorate has absolutely been starved of decent public transport. It has been absolutely ignored, abandoned and overlooked by the Labor Party. Even when we were promised so many benefits from the Metro Tunnel, what did we see? Those scaled right back by about 70 per cent of what was promised, through their axing of the turnback at Gowrie station, through their axing of the turnback at Essendon station, which means the good people on the Upfield line and the Craigieburn line miss out, because we went $5 billion over budget on that. And I did not hear a whimper from the members for Northern Metropolitan in this place or the Labor members in the northern suburbs in the other place about why the government cut those important turnbacks, which would have delivered frequency on those lines. We have more commuters on the Craigieburn line than the Frankston line, yet we have double the wait times. And what is the difference between the two lines? That would be marginal seats.

So we get this political exercise from the government. I found it interesting in the previous debate that Mr Galea said that they were barely keeping up with infrastructure in the growth areas. Maybe where the Clyde rail line ends and it is just an empty track with some long grass, they can put a plaque from Jacinta Allan for $70,000 that says ‘“Barely keeping up” – from your Labor government’, because that would be quite accurate. Then we see – and it was mentioned before in the government’s investments – the government changing the rules of the Growth Areas Infrastructure Contribution Fund so that it does not even need to be spent in the area now that it is collected from. The growth areas deliver the most amount of revenue through developer taxes and stamp duty into government coffers but somehow keep getting absolutely screwed. They keep getting absolutely screwed, whereby GAIC funds, instead of funding infrastructure like they were meant to, are now actually funding things that were previously funded out of consolidated revenue, like bus services. The government is claiming all these wins from bus services that they are taking directly from GAIC instead of consolidated revenue. GAIC was meant to be used for roundabouts, town halls, community centres, maternal and child health centres, road duplications and connections between estates, those kinds of long-lasting infrastructure. Except the government is consistently raiding GAIC to subsidise things that would otherwise need to be paid for.

Mr Galea said that free public transport would be, in the long term, in competition with other things that they have to fund, other things like schools and like hospitals. I remind Mr Galea that, as we know through the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee process and questions on notice, the Suburban Rail Loop East is now costing almost one-fifth of the government’s entire state capital program for the next four years. That includes schools. That includes hospitals. So when Mr Galea says that free public transport would be in competition with all those other services, this massive white elephant of the Cheltenham to Box Hill line is already in competition with it. They have got this ridiculous funding model. We heard brand new information from the Treasurer yesterday, which I know Ms Shing would have never revealed, of the government’s supposed 40-year loan for the up-front cost of $11.5 billion, through their value capture mechanism, would be funded including interest. Now, if you take the Treasury Corporation of Victoria yield for long-term loans, about 6.25 per cent, that means the cost of the interest on the value capture component – $11. 5 billion, let us be conservative with that – is over $28 billion, which means a supposed one-third of the project is almost $40 billion alone. This is what this government is signing us up for. We will never be able to do SRL North. The government says, ‘Oh, you can’t compare SRL East without SRL North.’ We will never be able to do that given the value capture component is going to cost almost $40 billion. If we are signed up to one-fifth of our state capital program for the next four years, it is going to be a greater amount than that for the next 40 years for one Cheltenham to Box Hill line.

Now, I look at my electorate, and I look at the boom gate failures at Donnybrook Road – it is stuffing up almost weekly. There are failures for the good people of Tarneit, for example, who cannot get on at that station. We have the member for Tarneit packing his suitcases to come to this chamber while his residents literally cannot get on a train. V/Line says it is the fastest-growing regional rail service. It is only the fastest growing because this government promised election after election to electrify rail lines and has not. Old regional country towns that had a V/Line going through them have had tens of thousands of homes built around the outside of them. From those same homes, the government has taken all the stamp duty revenue and all the developer taxes, and they are ploughing it towards a train line white elephant in the eastern suburbs. They are ploughing it towards their $200 billion debt pile, for which we are paying every day over a million dollars an hour just to service the interest on that debt from the wasteful spending that they have racked up. It is an outrage.

I speak of the Donnybrook level crossing. My constituent Lani wrote to me just a few weeks ago to tell me her story:

…a family in our community faced a medical emergency involving their one year old child. An ambulance was dispatched from Craigieburn but was blocked for more than 30 minutes because the boom gates were stuck down. This is not a hypothetical risk – this is a real incident where a child’s life was put in danger. Next time, the outcome could be far worse.

I have heard of stories from these boom gates where children were left outside of their primary school, like Mickleham South and other schools up in Kalkallo and Mickleham, for an over an hour because their parents were stuck behind a level crossing that keeps breaking down. Yet this government wants to invest in a brand new line that does not stack up. As I have just explained, even if it builds the first section, it can never build SRL North; it just will not happen based on the economics of how much they have consigned all Victorians to in the first stage. As I said, the value capture component alone is almost $40 billion. The Treasurer admitted last night in this chamber that it is going to be much more than $11.5 billion; it is going to be almost $40 billion just for that section. The whole section of SRL East is going to cost almost $60 billion. That is frightening for one project.

You have people in Clyde neglected, and you have people in Donnybrook and Wallan and Beveridge, which does not even have a train station since Labor closed it, neglected. Melton and Wyndham Vale – what is this now, the third or fourth election that Labor will take to the good people of Melton and Wyndham Vale that they are going to electrify their train line? The punters have figured this government out. This government does not care about decent public transport for people in our growth areas and our regions. If they did, they would be scrapping the vanity project, their Premier’s vanity project, of the Suburban Rail Loop and actually funding decent infrastructure. Ms Copsey mentioned accessible tram stops for places like Sydney Road. How long have the government sat on that for? Because again, it is funding crap projects that no-one asked for instead of projects that actually matter.

 David ETTERSHANK (Western Metropolitan) (16:33): I would personally like to thank Ms Copsey for bringing this motion before the chamber. Free public transport has been good for Victorians in this cost-of-living crisis. However, as has been observed, the benefits have not been evenly distributed, because not all Victorians have any access to public transport. For many of my constituents, any public transport at all would be good. Long before this latest cost-of-living crisis was brought on by fuel increases due to the war in Iran, people in the outer west and other growth areas were struggling to pay for transport. The lack of affordable, accessible, reliable public transport in these areas isolates residents from the types of facilities and amenities that most Melburnians take for granted and indeed many of us can simply walk to. If you are living in a suburb where the nearest place to buy a carton of milk or a tube of toothpaste is 8 kilometres away, owning more than one car is not a luxury; it is a necessity, and certainly a big expense you could do without.

So obviously they did not benefit from free public transport, and the government’s discounted car registration is simply not equivalent to discounted public transport. The standard passenger vehicle registration for the outer metro region is $871 per year, so with a 20 per cent discount a driver will save about $174 in rego costs for the year. Two-car households would save $348 per annum – and of course they are still paying for fuel – whereas a household that can access public transport would have saved $228 per month during the months of free public transport. Combined with the half-price fares in operation for the rest of the year, we are talking about a saving of around $900. It is not complex, it is not equitable and it is not new. It is typical of the government’s disregard for and neglect of the western suburbs. As Mr Mulholland said of the northern suburbs and of the far south-eastern, where there are safe Labor seats, there tend just not to be the services.

The recent announcement of a bus bonanza boosting services to better connect our suburbs sounded so very promising, but it only delivered some longer operating hours – that is good – and a few extra services. It was exactly the same piecemeal approach the government always takes to bus reform. They had the opportunity to do this in 2024, and they rejected it on a cost basis: it is too expensive. But we can drop $30 billion, $40 billion, $50 billion into the suburban rail link. I will just note, Mr Mulholland, that I think it is overly pessimistic of you to suggest that the delivery date for the suburban rail link for the northern and western suburbs is fake, because we have actually been told in the west that we can feel confident that Werribee will be hooked up by 2070.

To put it on a less sarcastic note, by way of example, buses were promised in the 2024–25 budget for a new route 140 linking Mount Atkinson to Rockbank station, and that is yet to even commence – seriously, 18 months after the residents were told they were getting a new bus, amongst a veritable blaze of press releases. How long does it take to operationalise a bus route? I get it if it is a new station, sure, but a bus route – a few signs, a few seats, some buses, some drivers. They are all potentially logistical issues, but 18 months and there is still no sign of the bus. A decent bus network would be transformative for the outer-western communities and would cost around $100 million a year to operate. It is not much more than the cost of a month of free public transport for Melbourne, which was I think around $70 million or, let us say, three days worth of interest on the state debt.

Certainly improvements to our public transport system could be funded by any number of sources, including tax reform, and yes, it does need to be addressed. But then we also need to look pragmatically at the savings that can be made on other infrastructural needs like roads and highways if we actually have a working bus network, so this is a complex agenda. We need to raise revenue, but we also need to recognise the real benefits not just environmentally but financially that a decent public transport system can offer. I do not think cost is necessarily the barrier, because this has been a long-term problem and something that could have been addressed at any time during Labor’s long tenure in government. I think it just ultimately comes down to a lack of priority and a lack of political will.

We support this motion from the Greens before the house. Members might recall that Legalise Cannabis moved a similar motion calling for free public transport not so long ago, but of course this was opposed by both the government and the opposition. In closing, I would just like to commend the motion to the chamber. It is thoughtful, it is appropriate, it is affordable and it is ultimately a profound social good.

 John BERGER (Southern Metropolitan) (16:40): I rise today to speak on the motion from the Greens party. Specifically, I rise to oppose the motion that has been put forward. The cost-of-living crisis has hit Victorians hard. Over the past few years we have seen people struggling with rising costs in all sectors of the economy. Chief among these have been the costs around transportation, which have increased by 6.6 per cent Australia-wide in the past year. It is becoming more and more expensive for Victorians to get around, whether they are going to work or to the shops or just travelling for leisure. This has only been made worse by the chaos and war in the Middle East. The war in Iran has driven up global oil prices, which increased the price of transport alongside them. This is not a war that this government chose, but it is a war which has impacts that have been felt globally.

As a state government we cannot control the world around us, but there are certain things that are within our control. The Allan Labor government has done what is within its power to reduce the cost-of-living pressures felt by Victorians as much as possible and to improve fuel security. For the months of April and May, this included making public transport free for all users across the network, saving commuters hundreds of dollars – a temporary measure to reduce pressure on households and prices at the pump. Free public transport not only made it cheaper to get around for those who use public transport, but it made it a clearer and cheaper alternative for getting around the state. This encouraged people to take public transport to work and saved millions of litres of petrol during the most acute stages of the ongoing oil crisis.

I want to acknowledge that not everyone in Victoria could make the switch to using public transport as their main means of getting around. Whether they need to use their car for work or they live in areas where public transport is not a viable option, it is important to recognise the struggle that these people face. The policy of the Allan Labor government to implement free public transport did help them indirectly, though, by reducing the amount of petrol being used in Melbourne, whereby shortages were alleviated across the state and prices were driven down.

This is not the only thing that the Allan Labor government is doing to help with the cost-of-living crisis and to reduce petrol usage. From 1 September, work from home will be a protected workplace right. Those who can feasibly do so will have the legal right to request to work remotely for at least two days a week, taking cars off the road and reducing cost pressures at the pump. It also reduces crowding on our public transport networks. This not only benefits those who are able to work from home, but it also benefits those commuters who will see lower demand for petrol and smoother, less crowded rides on public transport. These make up just a section of a broader constellation of policies that the Allan Labor government has introduced to work to ease cost-of-living pressures and reduce the consumption of petrol across our state.

Thankfully, we are through the most dangerous phase of the oil crisis and shortages have eased across the state due to the good work of our friends up in Canberra. However, the costs are still high and the war is still going. The risks faced by global oil markets and in turn the high prices of petrol and diesel at the pump are still present. That is why the Allan Labor government is continuing to act. Beyond just making public transport free for these past two months, we have extended half-price public transport fares for the remainder of the calendar year. This will mean fares will be capped at $5.70 for those full-fare tickets and $2.85 for those with concession tickets. This will save the average daily public transport commuter $850 between 1 June 2026 and 1 January 2027. It also means that we will have the cheapest daily fares in Australia.

We want Victorians who have made the switch to using public transport in their day-to-day lives over the past few months to continue to do so. As I said before, this will have direct benefits for those who use public transport and indirect benefits for Victorians from all over the state. Continuing to encourage people who can use public transport to do so will continue to save petrol across the state. This will help also reduce the cost pressures faced by those who cannot make the switch to using public transport. Making fares half-price is a sensible step to relieve the pressures felt by Victorians who use public transport to get around. I will hasten to add that on top of the half-price fares for the remainder of this year, public transport remains free for seniors on weekends and completely free for children under the age of 18.

These sensible policies, combined with the 20 per cent discount that we are offering on car registrations, are offering further cost-of-living relief to the Victorian community. It also reduces the pressure faced by motorists by reducing the petrol being used on our roads daily, reducing prices and the chance of shortages. Ensuring fuel security and reducing cost-of-living pressures are currently the top priorities of the Allan Labor government, and the evidence of the success of this policy is clear. According to the most recent ABS statistics on the matter, the cost of transportation has risen by 6.6 per cent across the major capital cities. This includes an astonishing 9.3 per cent increase in Brisbane over the last year. In Melbourne, meanwhile, we have had the lowest cost increase, at only 3.5 per cent over the last year. While this is still not ideal, we are the only capital with an increase below the 6.6 per cent average, and we have by far the best result.

We all hope for a swift and peaceful conclusion to the conflict in the Strait of Hormuz so that the pressure our transportation systems face can be relieved on a more permanent basis. In the meantime, not only is the Allan Labor government taking serious action on the cost-of-living crisis, we are also having clear success. Not only are the actions that the Allan Labor government is taking working, they are also fiscally responsible. At a time of rising debt costs, it is irresponsible to throw away the budget surplus that has been delivered by the Allan Labor government. That is in part why we are also moving to a half-price fare model. It is a more fiscally sustainable way of providing cost-of-living relief and still allows for the achievement of a budget surplus in the 2026–27 financial year. There are no details given on what taxes the Greens propose to introduce to make up the shortfall that would be generated, but I can tell you that they would have to be extensive. By slashing public transport fares, the effect encouraging Victorians to maintain the switch over to public transport will still remain and an important cost-of-living relief will still be present but it will be at the cost of the state’s fiscal health.

The Allan Labor government will act in a fiscally responsible way to bring down the cost of living. What is presented in this motion is not that simple. It is politics over substance from the Greens political party. It seeks a one-size-fits-all solution to a massively complex issue. To make public transport free on an ongoing basis would not only be incredibly expensive, as the Greens motion suggests, it would require ridiculous, near impossible levels of new taxation. It sounds wonderful on paper – we could make public transport free and frequent permanently if we just taxed businesses more – but it is just a complete fantasy. Free public transport makes sense in a moment of crisis, as we have faced in the past few months. As an ongoing policy it costs a ton. It limits our ability to fund necessary service improvements while benefiting those who are in a position to use the network and excluding those who cannot. The constellation of measures introduced by the Allan Labor government are doing the work, reducing the consumption of petrol and providing real and significant cost-of-living relief. The Allan Labor government is doing all of this while still ensuring fiscal stability is present without having to find a new onerous tax to raise or introduce. By doing so we are ensuring that we are not forgoing future upgrades to the Victorian public transport system. The combination of all these factors is why I oppose the motion, and I encourage all of my colleagues to do so.

 Renee HEATH (Eastern Victoria) (16:49): We are in a cost-of-living crisis – that is a fact. I hope, however, that we are very careful not to outsource the entire responsibility to individuals and nations that we have absolutely no control over. Businesses were fleeing this state before any overseas war broke out. 350 small businesses close their doors every single day. Victoria has not provided businesses with a good environment to thrive and with certainty. Businesses are leaving because of overbearing tax burdens and because of red tape. That is a reality. Rental providers are not leaving the state because of an overseas war – international wars affect other states too. They are leaving, again, because of overbearing tax burdens and because of red tape. It is a lot easier to have a rental property in any other state with less compliance.

Michael Galea: On a point of order, Acting President, I am just wondering if Dr Heath could be relevant to the motion, please. This is about public transport.

Renee HEATH: Further to the point of order, Acting President, I will read it out:

That this house notes that:

(1)   in a cost-of-living crisis –

Michael Galea: It is a bit of a wide –

Renee HEATH: No, it is not, Mr Galea. I will continue on.

Michael Galea: On a point of order, Acting President, as wide as the debate has been in some areas, none of the lead speakers have gone to what Dr Heath is referring to. I would ask that she please speak to the motion.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (John Berger): Whilst I agree with you, Mr Galea, it has been a wideranging debate, and I do ask that Dr Heath come back to the –

Members interjecting.

Katherine Copsey: Further to the point of order, Acting President, I did not read my motion out at the start when moving it in my name, but point (3) of the motion does note that the improvements could be funded by taxing the major banks and big corporations.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (John Berger): As I indicated before, I would ask Dr Heath return to the substance of the motion.

Renee HEATH: I will respond now directly to Ms Copsey’s point of order, and that is: I do not agree with the methods the Greens are presenting to fund this campaign of theirs, because if they had their way, the extra taxes on banks would drive up costs for the consumer. It would make everything less affordable, and then banks would join the rental providers and the 350 small businesses that also close their doors every day and decide to make their home in a more business-friendly state. Not only that, it would make home ownership more out of reach, driving up the housing crisis.

When the Allan Labor government decided to pay millions of taxpayer dollars to cancel the Commonwealth Games, not only did they break promises to rural and regional Victorians across the state, but they signalled to the world that Victoria is closed for business. Since Labor have come into power they have added or increased taxes 67 times. That is not due to a foreign war, that is due to Labor. Unlike what the Treasurer tried to tell us this morning, taxes do not actually make life better and easier for people; they make things less affordable. The cost-of-living crisis is exacerbated by factors that are external to us and things that we cannot control, but that is not what has caused this cost-of-living crisis. When the government allows corruption to run rife and $15 billion to be lost of taxpayer funds, somebody has got to foot that bill, and that is Victorians.

Every time a budget blows out it costs people money – money that belongs to the taxpayer. For a whole year I have raised concerns about the businesses in Bald Hill Road that are having their own cost-of-living crisis, not because of Donald Trump or because of a war in Iran but because the Allan Labor government’s Big Build has cut off access to their business for almost two years. That is going to cost the taxpayer. Rather, why don’t we get the management under control? It is mismanagement that has run small businesses into the ground, that has caused a cost-of-living crisis and that is making life unmanageable in this state. That is why Victorians are feeling the pinch, and now the government have to spend more taxpayer dollars to help Victorians deal with the cost-of-living crisis that they created.

I have spoken to hundreds of Eastern Victoria Region residents over the past couple of months about public transport, and the reason is this: I have a major concern that I have a responsibility to raise, and that is, while the government is offering free or half-price train fares, which are getting more people onto train lines, the government has also taken PSOs off 119 metro stations while violent crime is through the roof. In fact I will give you a statistic on that; I will just find it. There has been an increase of 74 per cent of serious crime at train stations. I would accept it, maybe, if crime was going down and, as crime was going down, so was the level of PSOs, but that is not what is happening in this state. Crime is going up. Seventy-four per cent is a leap. That is not a little incidental. That is not a mistake. That is a trend that things are going the wrong way. So why is it that the government, at a time when there is more demand – more people are using it – are making it less safe? Like I said, I have spoken to hundreds in the Eastern Victoria Region about this, and that is not an exaggeration, because I got every one of them to sign my petition. There have been hundreds.

I will talk about a few experiences. Some people have had terrifying experiences themselves. Some have witnessed crime. Others have just spoken about the feeling of not being as safe when there is not a PSO there. While the government says that community safety is its highest priority, its actions are telling a completely different story. I spoke about the man at a train station recently who had just had surgery. There was man who was very drug affected, and his dog started barking at this man. He became a victim of crime. This guy repeatedly punched him in the head, punched him in the stomach and tore his shirt down the middle. There was no PSO around, and that happened at a train station. I am really upset to see that after the death of Aidan Becker at the Mernda train station not only have the government reduced the hours of the Mernda police station but they have also taken PSOs off that station. That to me is absolutely unbelievable. This is despite the fact that two years prior – and I have spoken about this in this house – there was a young kid, at exactly the same spot where Aidan Becker, an innocent man, lost his life, that was chased by a machete there. I cannot abide this. This experience was known to police, and still PSOs are coming off. Crime is at an all-time high under Labor and serious offences against people on train stations, including assault, robbery, stalking and harassment, have increased by 74 per cent in the past four years. So please stop passing the buck. It is your responsibility to deal with these things.

The coalition will address this issue by returning all PSOs to those 119 stations. Not only will we do that, we will add an additional 200 PSOs covering night shifts between 6 pm and the last shift.

Harriet Shing interjected.

Renee HEATH: Ms Shing, why don’t you go look for the $15 billion rather than interrupting my speech here. We will reopen closed police stations, and we will deliver 300 extra police to keep our community safe. Our incredible police are fighting an uphill battle. They are 1500 –

Harriet Shing interjected.

Renee HEATH: No, she cannot eat into my time. Three minutes they have eaten –

Jacinta Ermacora: On a point of order, Acting President, I cannot see much relevance to free public transport, and even just straying a little bit from that main point, the debate has been completely off topic in a wide range of –

The ACTING PRESIDENT (John Berger): As I indicated before, Ms Ermacora, this has been a wideranging debate, and I would call the member back to the motion and for the rest of it to be in silence.

Renee HEATH: We have effective early intervention and rehab programs for young people that are at risk of becoming involved – this is a protection racket.

Harriet Shing: On a point of order, Acting President, firstly, I would ask Dr Heath to withdraw that assertion on the basis that it is unparliamentary and offensive.

Renee HEATH: What assertion?

Harriet Shing: Do you want to repeat it on the record?

Renee HEATH: What assertion, Minister? Actually, speak through the Chair.

Harriet Shing: I heard you say something. It was unparliamentary and offensive, and I ask that you withdraw. Your time is up.

The ACTING PRESIDENT (John Berger): Dr Heath, will you withdraw your comment?

Renee HEATH: I do not know what she is asking me to withdraw.

Harriet Shing: ‘Protection racket’ – seriously?

Renee HEATH: You want me to withdraw saying it is a protection racket? Is that what you are asking?

Harriet Shing: Don’t repeat the allegation; just withdraw it.

Nick McGowan: On a point of order, President, if the member’s objection is to the member on this side using the phrase or terminology ‘protection racket’ – that is all I heard; I did not hear anything other than that – then I would suggest to the President that that is a well-known, well-used phrase. It does not necessarily specifically impugn any one person.

Harriet Shing: There are lots of well-known phrases, Mr McGowan, that are deeply unparliamentary. I am just asking for this one to be withdrawn.

Nick McGowan: I think I have made my point of order nonetheless.

The PRESIDENT: I think when I came into the room, Dr Heath withdrew that.

Harriet Shing interjected.

The PRESIDENT: Well, she actually did. She got up and she withdrew, but taking to account Mr McGowan’s comment, there should be an exercise – maybe in the new term, when I am not here – going through all of this terminology and seeing if the house agrees or not whether it needs to be deemed unparliamentary. It is kind of a grey area in some instances, but then maybe there will be a smarter Presiding Officer that can work through all of that in a couple of months time.

 David LIMBRICK (South-Eastern Metropolitan) (17:01): This motion by Ms Copsey, by the Greens, is calling for free public transport. I know that this is something that they have been calling for for a long time. We need to look at this in terms of resources. All resources in an economy are scarce, and there are various ways of allocating those resources. The most efficient way of allocating resources is to have a market with a pricing mechanism, and then the price allows those resources to be allocated in the most efficient way. The most inefficient way of allocating resources is through socialist central planning and making everything, quote unquote, free, and that is precisely what the Greens are proposing here.

The pricing system that we already have for public transport is highly irrational, where we have short trips that are excessively expensive and long trips that are ridiculously cheap. What I would like to see in Victoria is actually a rational public transport pricing system. Maybe before that point people will connect the dots and say, ‘Well, they’re always complaining about why there’s not a bus in this area or why the buses are so infrequent or why there isn’t a train station built, and at the same time we have a highly irrational pricing system.’ Maybe they could connect the dots between those things, because when you have a centrally planned system, what you end up with is, rather than rationing through pricing, rationing through queuing. That is why in free systems, rather than paying for a service, you simply do not get access to the service. That is why under socialist systems that control food you queue up for bread. That is why under our public health system, where we have free public health, that is great but, unless you are having a baby or having a heart attack, it is actually very difficult to get access to a hospital for a procedure, as my family discovered recently through one of my children.

Indeed it is helpful to look at other parts of the world. One part that I know very well and is widely acknowledged to have pretty much the best public transport system in the world is Japan. One of the reasons that their public transport system is so good is, firstly, it is not actually run by the government – their public transport system is fully privatised – but also they have a rational pricing system where you pay for the distance travelled. If you travel a short distance, you pay a really cheap fee, and if you travel a long distance, it costs more money.

Suffice to say, if we want to have a system where everything is free, quote unquote, what we are going to end up doing is having constantly competing interests. Rather than demand producing the capital required to provide for the desires of the population – in this case public transport – we are going to have a system where we constantly have to force the people that are not taking public transport to pay for the people that are taking public transport, which will always result in conflict and always does result in conflict. That is why economic systems like what the Greens are proposing nearly always fail, and if they do not fail, they cause lots of misery in the meantime.

The Libertarian Party will definitely not be supporting free public transport. In fact I would urge the government to move towards a more rational pricing model, because one of the reasons that we do not have the capital to allocate to lots of these things, to expanding public transport, is because our pricing system is totally irrational at the moment. The government made it more irrational when they got rid of one of the zones. We used to have three zones to try and make it a little bit rational; now we have only got two. But our pricing system is ending up in misallocation of resources, and if we want those scarce resources allocated in the most efficient way, the way to do that is to have a rational price signal built into the system that will mean that people will take the most efficient means of transport rather than take whatever is subsidised by the government and other people who are not taking that form of transport. So the Libertarian Party will not be supporting this motion.

 Sheena WATT (Northern Metropolitan) (17:06): Can I start by saying that the effects of Donald Trump’s war on Iran are being felt right across the globe, and while our government cannot control events like those in the Middle East, we are certainly taking action in both the short and long term to make life more affordable for Victorians. In the public transport space, we did that through the emergency measure of free public transport, and it was a game changer in lessening the immediate blow of this overseas conflict. It was the true universality of this policy that made it so popular and so effective at bringing down working Victorians’ household budgets. Communities up and down my electorate benefited in all different ways from this measure. Whether it was the students living in Brunswick taking the number 19 tram to uni every day or the office workers living in Broady taking the train to and from work on the Craigieburn line – or somebody who recently wrote to me, a high schooler, taking the 561 from Res to Coburg for his part-time job – this policy was real cost-of-living relief for all Victorians from all walks of life.

The effects of free public transport extended far beyond real cost-of-living relief. Victoria has some of the best regional offerings in Australia, and our free public transport allowed so many Victorians to escape the city and enjoy everything our state has to offer. Certainly I have heard from constituents that live in the inner city and mainly use bikes to get around while studying at uni. Like many folks in the inner north – well, not me; I am not an avid cyclist – one is an avid cyclist, and free public transport allowed him and his partner to explore wonderful regional offerings, packing light and hopping on the V/Line every weekend. It was a delight to hear. It opened up their world in ways they did not expect, and it was all right at their doorstep, from the Bass Coast to the Bellarine, from Bendigo to Ballarat, from early morning V/Lines to late afternoon returns to Southern Cross. He recounted how they often visited at least three separate towns in two months of free public transport, and they were already planning their next weekend trip on the V/Line. For him, it was unfamiliar territory. But for so many businesses across our wonderful regional areas he was just one of many, many new customers – Victorians that would not normally explore Beechworth or Torquay or Inverloch if it were not for the free train and bus that carried them there. Not only did free public transport ease pressure on household budgets during a worldwide oil crisis, it brought new people into Victoria’s wonderful regional towns, supporting local businesses and opening up the state to experiences, with so many Victorians choosing a day trip or weekend away when they might otherwise have stayed in Melbourne.

But it did not just open the doors for Victorians to spend their autumn weekends in Victoria’s picturesque regions; patronage in the inner city has now reached pre-COVID levels. Melburnians did not just take the opportunity for a weekend or daytrip out in the city; public transport use across Melbourne’s trams, trains and buses has been absolutely supercharged. Over the two months of free public transport it is estimated that 100 million trips were taken across our state’s public transport system. That is less cars on the road, less congestion, more time with family and friends and more foot traffic in and out of our city’s fantastic pubs, cafes and shops. This government is not just about short-term emergency measures. We are also looking to the future, and we understand that the effects of the overseas conflict will continue to affect Victorians far into the future. That is why we have made fares in Victoria half-price for the rest of the year. As I have mentioned, the impacts of Donald Trump’s actions – well, they were fast and brutal. The cost of filling up the car for the commute to work or to take the kids to school spiked drastically and at no fault of Victorians. I am really proud that Labor’s free public transport was able to soften the blow for working families and their transport costs. The worst of it might be over, but our government is always looking for ways to make Victorians’ lives more affordable. That is why we introduced half-price public transport fares for the rest of the year, because we know that whilst Victorians have overcome the worst shocks of this fuel crisis, for many families there is still pain. Our government is not a government of short-term bandaids. We are a government that responds to immediate global shocks with decisive measures, but we also respond to the medium- and long-term challenges. We know that half-price public transport fares will continue to make a real difference to Victorian families. It is worth noting that the half-price public transport fares will assist those that we know need it most and that students and concession card holders will see their public transport fares brought even further down, with a uni student now only having to pay $1.42 to get anywhere in the state, whether that be to uni, a part-time job or even a night out in the city.

There are some in this chamber that understandably have called for us to continue free public transport indefinitely, but that fundamentally misses a key point of what fares do for our public transport network. When you tap on and off and you pay a fare when travelling on a bus, a train or a tram, that is money that is invested back into our public transport system. Free public transport has been a highly effective and popular stopgap for families feeling it at the pump, but we want to continue to add services like the 24,000 weekly bus services we have added. If you want to continue to roll out fantastic new rolling stock like the X’Trapolis 2.0, or if you want to continue to increase accessibility to our tram network, it is critical that revenue generated from fares continues to come in so that it can be reinvested into our public transport system. You see with half-price fares for the rest of the year, our government gets the balance right. We can continue to fund our already world-class public transport system with new rolling stock, upgrades to stations and more frequent services, while having amongst the lowest daily fares in the country at $5.70, much lower than Sydney at $19.30 a day and Adelaide at $12.50 a day. It is only Labor that can both keep our public transport fares amongst the lowest daily in Australia and increase the services, improving accessibility and maintaining one of the best public transport networks in the country – indeed, if you speak to some of the tourists that I do in Melbourne CBD, they would say in the world.

In summary, our government is getting the balance right, providing much-needed relief to Victorians with their transport bills for both short-term and long-term measures, while also ensuring that Victorians can stay connected to employment opportunities, to education and entertainment through increased services and better rolling stock. The truth is that only Labor can get this balance right. Only Labor has a plan to make life easier and more affordable for Victorians. With the time that I have left, I actually just want to address some of the remarks that were made by other members in this chamber to this motion before us. I will begin perhaps with the mover of the motion, who spoke to the importance of this debate, and I join her in saying thank you for bringing it to us, because for me I love an opportunity to talk about public transport and how much it is loved. What was also raised was something that I have personally been following, and that is the Melton electrification announcement. I have heard that being referred to as feasibility planning, but it is simply not true. It represents a real misunderstanding of the steps that go into delivering a project like this – a very significant project. This is to be expected, because the Melton electrification plan is not just simply a feasibility plan but a vital development and preparatory works. They are finalising the design, the scope and the delivery of timelines. It includes securing power supply, site investigations, final approvals and working with our contract partners to award the delivery for contract in mid-2027. It is not just a feasibility plan; it is much, much more than that, and I would implore all to understand the depths required to get this off the ground. Can I just put that on the record and say that I am joining with the member for Melton in very much getting behind this project, and I know that it will be much loved in that part of the world when it comes to be.

Can I also just finish up with some remarks that I wish to make regarding the Tarneit line and that residents in Tarneit cannot get a train. Well, let me just say there are certainly train services right across the west – those services that have been improved since the introduction of the Metro Tunnel. We all need to get on the same page when it comes to the enormity of our system and knowing that in here, we on this side are big supporters of public transport and know that the last two months have been extraordinarily well received. I believe that in the next few months until the end of the year we will see many continue to take up free public transport and half-price fares right until the end of the year with much gusto.

 Gaelle BROAD (Northern Victoria) (17:16): I am pleased to be able to speak on this motion. Public transport is so important. I use it a lot. I came down on the train to come to Parliament and I will be heading back that way as well. I just think it is worth putting on the record too that at the last election in November 2022, it was actually on 9 October that our side of politics announced lower fares for public transport. That was on 9 October, and then whoa, guess what? Daniel Andrews in November announced a reduction in fares as well. I think it is often talked about, but credit where credit is due: it was actually our side of politics that was bringing down the cost of public transport. It particularly made a big impact to regional areas and that accessibility, because it has been very expensive in the past to catch the train from Bendigo to Melbourne, for example.

The free public transport certainly cannot support the Greens approach, which is ‘everything is free, someone else will pay for it’. I think we know the reality is that this has cost the budget over $430 million, so there is a cost to public transport and we need to be mindful of that. I know at the time, certainly fuel prices have been extraordinary and giving some relief to people is important. But some of the issues that we confronted, particularly on the regional lines, was that it was announced very quickly and then we had a huge amount of people using the trains and people standing for hours, travelling places and then also being left on the platform and being told, ‘No, you have got to hop off’ with not enough space for them to get back on. We had people with prams and people with scooters that were being told, ‘Sorry, no space for you.’ I also heard from people that needed medical appointments with specialists that had been booked well ahead, and because of this announcement, there was actually no ability to book a seat anymore. That was removed and it caused a lot of angst for people that had waited a long time for medical appointments.

When we talk about public transport, Labor certainly promise big. They have promised big, certainly in Bendigo – more frequent services, faster train services. As I mentioned in this house yesterday, Golden Square Action Group has been in contact pointing out how they are actually slower than what they have been in the past. For things that had been promised, like the Harcourt station, there was not even a bus service operating properly.

We have raised on our side the need for more PSOs, particularly in regional areas, and the lack of bus services that exist so close to Bendigo in places like Marong and Strathfieldsaye – very built up, growing populations there, but yes, very little support when it comes to public transport. There was some money allocated to bus review funding in the last budget for the Bendigo area, and that work has not yet commenced. I think what we see under this government is a constant waste of taxpayer money – we saw that with the $15 billion on corruption – and I feel that it is just so important that we do follow the money, because we need more services, particularly in regional areas. We need better public transport. We need money to invest in our hospitals. We need money to repair and build better roads and bridges. There is a very long list, and yet we continue to see waste under this government – it needs to stop. I hope it certainly will come November.

 Katherine COPSEY (Southern Metropolitan) (17:20): Thank you, everybody. It has been a great debate this afternoon, and I appreciate the thought that members have given to their contributions. I will just address a few things that have been raised in the debate which are a consistent feature of discussion around pricing of fares and whether or not free public transport is feasible; clearly it is. This is something that the government has chosen to turn off and on like a tap. We had a free public transport little celebration when the government opened the Metro Tunnel, and they chose to pull this lever in response to the fuel crisis recently. It is something that the government can choose to do. It is an affordable measure in the scheme of public budgets. There have been several times this afternoon when it has been stated that we have to choose between service delivery and service improvement and free public transport, and plainly that is not the case. We can do both, we can walk and chew gum, and the Greens position is that we should. We should have free and frequent public transport available permanently for the people of Victoria. At the very least the government should be continuing the free public transport that is available while the conditions that prompted them to bring it in persist. We still see the Strait of Hormuz being closed, and we still see a global fuel crisis on top of and compounding the cost-of-living crisis that Victorians are facing. It is pretty cheeky of the government, honestly, to hike prices again, at the end of May, when those conditions persist and to ask Victorians to be grateful for their 50 per cent fares, which it has only graciously extended until just after the state election. I think Victorians can see through that. I think Victorians deserve better, and I would urge Victorians to demand better. We know that for the price of a single polluting toll road the government could provide free public transport in this state for 25 years, so it is a matter of priorities.

If you want to go further, and indeed the Greens do, we have a different vision. We have a vision for this state where if we make big corporations like the gambling industry, like the fossil fuel industry, pay their fair share of tax, we can have the things that we need that make life decent, affordable and dignified, like free public transport, like continued investment in protection of and expansion of public housing rather than seeing it torn down. These things are possible. We get told constantly from around this chamber that they are impossible, and then suddenly in moments the government finds some political courage, usually at the urging of one of the other parties in this place that have put a good idea on the table –

Tom McIntosh interjected.

Katherine COPSEY: We are going to try. Mr McIntosh urges the Greens to win enough seats to form government. Let me tell you, we have been here since 2006, we continue to grow and we continue to do the work and put the ideas on the table that the Labor government then takes up. Free public transport is just the latest example in decades of Greens wins that have come out of this place. We ended native forest logging. That was impossible until it was done. We are going to keep seeing progressive policy implemented in this state at the urging of the Greens, and we have got a plan to do it. We have looked into what this would cost the budget, and we have put revenue measures on the table that would help pay for this and many other things that would help Victorians at this moment of housing and cost-of-living crises.

I really do thank members for their consideration. I also just want to touch on, in my closing, that I think one of the great things through this period of free public transport in Victoria has been the increased focus that we have seen on the persistent systemic failures of our public transport system in Victoria. I spoke to a number of those – around service frequency, lack of PT coverage and PT deserts – that have been so persistent. This government need to stop promising at election after election that they are going to fund this infrastructure, like the electrification of the Melton line, like the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 compliance, and just actually get on and do it. It is shameful that we are still waiting for these basic services. But the Greens are really pleased to have had an opportunity this afternoon to keep putting this idea on the table. We want to see public transport made free and frequent in Victoria, and I urge all parties to get behind that idea today.

Council divided on motion: