Legislative Council Committee A, Monday 5 June 2023

CHAIR - Regarding, bus shelters, is that the responsibility of the state or is it a responsibility of local government where the shelter should be?

Mr FERGUSON - Both.

CHAIR - How is it determined who's responsible for what?

Mr FERGUSON - Different individuals and separate players have different opinions on this. My advice and our understanding - and the basis upon which we are proceeding with our $10 million bus shelter plan is as follows: that the owner of the road asset is responsible for the delivery and the provision of bus stop infrastructure, including shelters.

That effectively means that if it's a state road, a state responsibility, it should be funded by the Tasmanian government and delivered and responsibility taken at that level. If it is on a council-owned road, then it should be provided by the council. In the main, those road managers - state and council - respect and honour that. When you are confronted with legacy under-investment, you won't be surprised to hear me say that councils often say, 'well, we think it should be your responsibility'. Those conversations do occur.

That is the position at law and by the Government and others can have their opinion, but that is perhaps not progressing the situation. The situation being as well that we have not just underinvestment but in many cases infrastructure that's not fit for purpose, particularly from a disability point of view.

CHAIR - It is not even there.

Mr FERGUSON - Or not there at all; or very basic and informal. We don't propose that everybody can overnight upgrade their infrastructure, but as part of our election commitment and which is now in the Budget, we've provided a $10 million fund which I might speak to.

The $10 million is to provide better bus stops and wherever we're able to, all-access and all-weather bus stops at priority locations. The further priority will be to achieve compliance with the Disability Discrimination Act, and improve passenger amenity through the delivery of bus shelters, where appropriate. My department has established a methodology to prioritise funding, and is working with councils and bus operators to deliver the best value from this investment.

The department prepared an initial bus stop priority list for engagement with councils and bus operators individually in 2022, last year. These lists have been further refined through ongoing consultation with disability advocacy groups, bus operators and community groups via the councils. Then we invited councils to begin to apply for the first round of the grant program in January 2023. Applications closed in February and we have taken the funds that are available and we are planning to run it in four rounds, so that everybody doesn't necessarily feel that they have to do it straight up, at the beginning.

That first round has opened and closed. We are shortly to announce the outcomes of that. In short, the councils that applied for the funds are going to get the funds. Those that sit on the sidelines thinking that they'll just leave it to the Government to do one day might have to reconsider that position because they are going to see other councils co-funded.

CHAIR - Is the funding dollar for dollar?

Mr FERGUSON - It is dollar for dollar. We will also recognise in-kind works. We're providing as much help as we feel we can and need to, but we're also trying to maximise the yield from that $10 million so that we get as much co-investment from councils as possible. Without this fund, one of two things would happen: councils would not do any work and there would be no improvements; and, secondly, councils would do the work and get no help. What we're trying to do here is partner and provide this opportunity. I understand the application process was reasonably well supported; but any that miss out in the first round will be encouraged to apply for the second round, which I'm advised is expected to open in mid-2023, so in the near future. I am advised that we received applications from 15 councils in round 1.

CHAIR - Are you able to provide any documentation about how you assess what a priority location is, and the methodology for looking at the priority list? Then subsequent to that, who is on it?

Mr FERGUSON - Do you mean who or where is on it?

CHAIR - Well, pretty much if it is a council, I mean where. It could be a geographically large council, but obviously the location is important there.

Mr FERGUSON - The priority locations would be easy to generate because we have shared them with operators on councils.

Mr GOODSIR - I think so. That, again, is made to assist councils. It does not limit them. It is just meant to give those councils that might have done less work a leg up. We have that work and alongside that, the actual guideline itself also quite clearly sets out how applications will be assessed.

CHAIR - Can you provide the guidelines?

Mr FERGUSON - I have just asked for a printout. We will provide them to the committee. They are very user-friendly for councils. It is through a process that they are fairly familiar with. It is not the same but very similar to the other schemes that we provide to councils, including the Vulnerable Road User Program and Safer Rural Roads.

CHAIR - When did you say you are announcing that successful round 1 grantees?

Mr FERGUSON - Coming days, very soon.

CHAIR - You can't do it today then?

Mr GOODSIR - I am not prepared, I don't have that information

Mr FERGUSON - But very soon. We'll then be able to move then quite quickly to round 2.

Mr GOODSIR - Just a note that the priority set we developed was for all councils. We didn't just favour large councils. Every council had a list to choose from if they wanted to, but they could add also.

CHAIR - A list in terms of actual locations?

Mr GOODSIR - Yes.

CHAIR - You identified the locations within each local government area - is that right?

Mr GOODSIR - That we believed was a priority. We were not constraining councils to that. We were just giving it to them as a starting point. We made sure that if we had known issues with a disability access, for example, at a particular location, they were not on the list. We just made sure that councils did not have to start from ground zero.

CHAIR - You looked at disability access. What else were the considerations about where they might be beyond that when you were looking at identifying priority sites?

Mr CRANE - In terms of disability access, obviously what infrastructure we had in place, such as the tactile on the ground, where the pole was, the blade, et cetera, the hard stand. Then we also had criteria around where we think it is suitable for a shelter; part of the program is that this is an all-weather, all-accessible program. We are very keen to increase the amenity through improved shelters, but you need some kind of guidelines around where best to put a shelter to get the maximum benefit in patronage levels, et cetera.

CHAIR - They are usually where the people wait to get on the bus, wouldn't they be?

Mr FERGUSON - Quite right, which is different to a high-volume return-to-suburb bus stop, for example, where people are usually getting off a bus and then quickly moving off to their car or walking home. But when they are waiting for the bus to bring them to their - often a city centre or a suburban centre - then that is more likely to need a shelter. To the question of how the priority list was selected -

Mr GOODSIR - I was just going to answer. Inbound boarding numbers was a criterion as well - not in absolute. We still did that for each council.

CHAIR - But you are not going to see the same numbers of people getting on the bus in Wynyard as you'll get in Hobart.

Mr GOODSIR - No, that's what I'm trying to say, that we didn't say we won't list you because it's less than that, we said within your council.

CHAIR - Okay. All right. So you'll provide the priority locations and the guidelines to us.

Mr FERGUSON - Yes. The guidelines can be here in minutes. The locations perhaps I'll take that on notice.