I am pleased to speak today on the Personalised
Transport Ombudsman Bill. As other members have mentioned, the goal of the bill is to establish a
Personalised Transport Ombudsman to provide a complaints resolution function for the personalised
transport industry. The PTO Bill implements the government’s commitment to establish an ombudsman
for this industry.
The bill will also enable the pilot of a new ticketing solution. It will be great to see that rolled out
across the state as a result of the state entering into a contract with QBIC to deliver this new ticketing
solution for public passenger transport across Queensland. The new ticketing system will be a step up
in technology. It will be account based, allowing customers to pay for and access public transport using
a variety of payment methods. We see this in other countries and major cities around the world. It will
have a real, positive impact, particularly for tourism. It will be much easier for tourists to use their
smartphone devices, credit cards or what have you to access the go card network rather than sign up
to a formal card.
I also note the proposed minor amendments to existing legislation to improve enforceability,
remove spent provisions and provide greater legal certainty for industry. It is good that there are
measures to combat fare evasion and to improve enforceability. A ticketing system is only good if it can
be enforced. It is good for fare box revenue and those important aspects.
The range of complaints that could be considered by the ombudsman are broad and may include
complaints about the safety of a vehicle, individual issues or transport drivers’ working conditions, an
important aspect. In my maiden speech I mentioned the gig economy and its opportunities and
challenges. Any moves by the government to address concerns and to look after the working conditions
of emerging industries are very important. Certainly, personalised transport is a growing area. It is
positive that the government is intervening where necessary to protect working conditions. The fact that
there will be no charge for the ombudsman’s services is also a positive measure. It will be free to access,
and anyone can do it.
In relation to the committee’s report recommendation 4, that the minister clarify in his second
reading whether representative bodies will be able to access the services, it was great to hear the
minister’s earlier clarification. Organisations such as unions can contact the ombudsman or assist
people to contact the ombudsman. That is a positive step in terms of the helpful resolution of issues.
With regard to recommendation 2, that the minister consider amending the bill to remove the time
period a potential candidate has been absent from the industry and only exclude current industry
participants, it was pleasing to hear that the minister will move an amendment as a result of the
committee’s examination so that the period of time out of the industry will be reduced from five years to
three years. It was good to hear of some movement on that, and that is what we heard from
stakeholders.

In relation to recommendation 5 about public reporting, it was good to hear the minister say that
this was supported. The more public reporting of issues that the transport ombudsman deals with, the
more we help increase transparency and the public’s knowledge of what they are dealing with.
It was disappointing to hear the opposition members say that they oppose the bill. Their
comments on the report reflect that they are having a bet each way. It is disappointing to hear that they
are not supporting the bill as it currently stands. I thank the committee members for the process and for
the examination. I thank the witnesses who appeared before the committee. The committee staff, as
always, did a great job in examining the bill. I commend the bill to the House.