Personalised Transport Ombudsman Bill 2019
Bill Story
The journey of this bill through Parliament, including debate and recorded votes.
Referred to Transport and Public Works Committee
▸1 procedural vote
Vote to grant leave
Mr Bleijie (LNP) sought leave to move a motion without notice after the bill passed. The motion was defeated (44-47) as Labor used their numbers to deny leave.
Permission was refused.
A vote on whether to grant permission — for example, to introduce an amendment or vary normal procedure.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (44)
Noes (47)
That the bill be now read a second time
Vote to advance the Personalised Transport Ombudsman Bill to the committee stage. ALP and Greens voted in favour (48); LNP, KAP, PHON and independents voted against (42). The bill passed.
The motion passed.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (48)
Noes (42)
▸21 members spoke7 support14 oppose
As Minister for Transport and Main Roads, introduced and defended the bill establishing the Personalised Transport Ombudsman to help resolve complaints in the personalised transport industry, emphasising independence, impartiality and cost-effectiveness.
“The Personalised Transport Ombudsman is founded on principles of independence, impartiality, integrity and the public interest, and no reading of the bill could come to any other conclusion.”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
As shadow minister, argued the ombudsman would be a 'toothless tiger' with limited investigative powers and no ability to make binding decisions. Advocated instead for a statutory personalised transport commissioner with real powers.
“Given the many concerns that we have with the proposed bill, the LNP's position will be to oppose it. When it comes to formulating legislation there is a golden rule, which is around the fact that you do not legislate what you are not prepared to enforce.”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
As committee chair, supported the bill while acknowledging it was not exactly what the former committee recommended. Welcomed the minister accepting recommendations on reducing exclusion periods and public reporting.
“This model of PTO is not exactly what was recommended for the industry by the former public works and utilities committee that I chaired last parliament, but I hope the solution does work well.”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
Described the bill as a waste of time and a toothless tiger that will not address the substantive issues facing the taxi industry, particularly the impact of rideshare on taxi licence values.
“This bill is a waste of time. Based on feedback to the transport committee—it is a toothless tiger—it really does not do anything.”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
Supported the bill for establishing a free-to-access ombudsman and welcomed provisions addressing working conditions in the gig economy. Expressed disappointment at opposition not supporting the bill.
“Any moves by the government to address concerns and to look after the working conditions of emerging industries are very important.”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
As committee member, argued the bill is a farce not supported by any stakeholder submissions. Criticised it as creating another highly paid bureaucrat achieving nothing.
“This bill is a farce and was not supported by any submissions made to the committee.”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
Strongly supported the bill, highlighting local public transport improvements in Townsville and welcoming the new smart ticketing provisions that would benefit regional Queensland.
“Instead of having a go card like they have in Brisbane, we are going better. That is thanks to Minister Bailey recognising that Townsville is one of the key sites where mobile phones can be used for ticketing.”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
Argued the bill represents Labor's failure to grasp new technologies and business models, with flawed consultation resulting in an ombudsman that stakeholders describe as a toothless tiger.
“The overwhelming feedback from stakeholders to the Transport and Public Works Committee is that, with so many flaws in the vision for a public transport ombudsman and how the Ombudsman looks set to carry out its role, this ultimately is little more than a waste of money and a pointless role.”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
Supported the smart ticketing provisions of the bill, highlighting the $371 million investment that would bring advanced ticketing technology to all Queenslanders including regional areas.
“Smart ticketing will also benefit tourism in Townsville. I am sure there are many members who, like me, intend to return for a holiday, because it is just so beautiful up here.”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
Expressed strong scepticism about the ombudsman's effectiveness, citing the rideshare rollout as an example where complaints went unaddressed. Viewed it as another costly layer of bureaucracy.
“I see this as another cost, another layer of bureaucracy, between us and the decision-makers... We have some extreme cynicism about its effectiveness and about whether this is good use of Queensland taxpayers' money.”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
Supported the bill for establishing an independent ombudsman with criminal history checks and conflict of interest provisions, and welcomed the smart ticketing system for regional Queensland.
“The establishment of the Personalised Transport Ombudsman will provide a reputable and independent regulator.”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
Argued the ombudsman is window-dressing with no power to compel parties to do anything. Noted both the Taxi Council and Rideshare Drivers' Association opposed the bill.
“Ultimately, I have to ask myself why we are here debating this legislation. If this ombudsman has no power to do very much, why waste time, money, energy and effort on setting up it up?”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
As former transport minister, strongly supported the bill as the logical next step in the regulatory framework for personalised transport, contrasting Labor's proactive approach with the Newman government's inaction on Uber.
“It is Queensland Labor that brought ride-booking services out of the shadows. It will be Queensland Labor that ensures it continues to create employment across our state within a rigorous regulatory environment.”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
Criticised the bill for creating an ombudsman that cannot investigate government policy and has controlled scope. Also attacked the government's record on fare evasion.
“If this position is supposedly independent, why can it not investigate government policy? If it is bad policy and it affects taxpayers, why should it not be investigated?”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
Argued the bill should be redrafted since all major stakeholders oppose it. Emphasised the economic devastation caused to taxi licence holders by industry disruption.
“Why are we proceeding with this bill when we have stakeholders, the industry itself, saying that this position will be a toothless tiger?”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
As former shadow transport minister, cited extensive stakeholder opposition including unions. Argued the LNP's proposed personalised transport commissioner would be far more effective.
“This is a bad bill. If we vote for it today we make it bad law. By making it bad law we have not achieved anything.”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
Questioned why regional Queenslanders should fund an ombudsman when rideshare companies do not fund their own HR functions, and criticised unequal regulation between taxis and rideshare.
“Is it fair that the people in regional and remote Queensland should be committing their hard-earned tax dollars when the likes of Uber and Lyft cannot be bothered to fund their own human resources and workplace health and safety functions?”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
Argued the bill has major flaws with key stakeholders having no faith anything will be achieved. Welcomed smart ticketing provisions but opposed the ineffective ombudsman.
“An ombudsman needs real powers to investigate issues and for their decisions to be binding. If, as the minister has said, that would be a duplication of scope, perhaps we need to ask whether the office has any purpose at all.”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
Criticised the bill as typical of the government's approach of creating process rather than outcomes, arguing the ombudsman will produce more bureaucracy for little gain.
“It is very clear that this aligns with the typical behaviour of this government, which is to take the following approach: there's a problem so let's do something about it; let's pass an act; let's appoint someone... It is about optics and it is about process, but it is not about outcomes.”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
Noted that all major stakeholder groups oppose the bill and stood with industry in opposing it, contrasting Labor's approach with the LNP's proposed commissioner model.
“This is clearly an embarrassing outcome for the Labor government. After nearly five years, it clearly still does not have a clue about the industry and the challenges it is facing.”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
Criticised the bill for creating an ombudsman in name only that can only identify and report problems, not solve them. Also noted the lack of specified qualifications for the role.
“Basically, this legislation sets up an ombudsman that is really in name only. As we have heard earlier, it will be a 'toothless tiger'.”— 2019-09-03View Hansard
That the amendment be agreed to
Vote on Minister Bailey's amendment to clause 2 changing the commencement provision from assent to proclamation, allowing time for ombudsman recruitment. Passed with government support.
The motion passed.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (49)
Noes (41)
That the minister’s amendments Nos 2 to 4, as circulated, be agreed to
The motion passed.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (49)
Noes (41)
▸1 clause vote (all passed)
Vote on clause 1
Procedural vote during Consideration in Detail to retain clause 1 (short title) of the bill. Government and crossbench voted yes (49); opposition voted no (41).
The clause was kept in the bill.
A vote on whether a specific clause should remain in the bill as written.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (49)
Noes (41)
That the long title of the bill be agreed to
Procedural vote to formally adopt the bill's long title following third reading. Passed with government support (49-41).
The motion passed.
▸Show individual votesHide individual votes
Ayes (49)
Noes (41)
Plain English Summary
Overview
This bill creates the Personalised Transport Ombudsman to resolve complaints about taxis, rideshare, limousines and booked hire services. It also updates legislation to support Queensland's new $371 million public transport ticketing system, which will allow passengers to pay using contactless cards, smartphones or wearables.
Who it affects
Anyone who uses taxis, Uber, or other rideshare services gains a new avenue for complaints. Public transport users will benefit from more payment options when the new ticketing system launches.
Personalised Transport Ombudsman
Establishes an independent Ombudsman to investigate complaints about personalised transport services. The Ombudsman can require parties to provide information, attend meetings, and must report on systemic issues to the Minister.
- Creates the Office of the Personalised Transport Ombudsman as an independent body
- Allows anyone to lodge complaints about taxis, rideshare, limousines or booked hire services
- Ombudsman can investigate complaints and help parties reach resolution
- Protects complainants from reprisal by operators or drivers
Public transport ticketing
Updates fare evasion laws and payment systems to support Queensland's new ticketing solution, which will allow passengers to pay using contactless bank cards, smartphones and wearables alongside go cards.
- Moves fare evasion offences to regulations for flexibility as payment technology evolves
- Enables information sharing to verify concession fare entitlements
- Allows continued use of unclaimed credit from dormant passenger accounts
- Supports contactless payments via cards, phones and wearable devices
Transport operator requirements
Clarifies when operators and drivers need accreditation or authorisation, and makes minor improvements to taxi licence and driving sanction rules.
- Clarifies operator accreditation and driver authorisation requirements
- Reduces penalties for holding the wrong category of accreditation
- Removes ability for taxi licence holders to request transfers between service areas
- Extends driving sanctions to offences committed while driving taxis, booked hire vehicles or limousines