ALRTA Weekly Update: Dec 12

Australia’s Trusted Partner for Transport Innovation

Welcome everyone to the weekly news,

Our Heavy Vehicle Charges Submission: Enough is Enough

This week we finalised ALRTA’s submission to the National Transport Commission (NTC) on proposed heavy vehicle charges for 2026–27.

Members can read the full text in our submission, which clearly sets out why a fourth consecutive 6% increase is the
wrong decision for an industry under unprecedented strain.

What government is calling a “modest” increase would, in reality, come on top of:

• 6% in 2023–24
• 6% in 2024–25
• 6% in 2025–26
• Plus 2.75% in 2022–23

In only four years, operators have already absorbed more than 19% in compounded increases, with another 6% now on the table.
For many small and medium rural carriers - already facing higher fuel, finance, labour and insurance costs - enough is enough. The industry has run out of buffer, and the data on business closures and insolvencies proves it.

Hearing It Directly from Members: A Grounding Reality Check

Last week I met with the LRTASA committee, and the conversation with members was direct and important.
Operators told me plainly what it feels like to be in the job right now:

• Increased oversight and compliance pressure is taking a real toll.
• The cost of keeping up with regulatory obligations continues to grow, and we need to be aware of that in our work from a representative level.
• Many feel they are being “watched more than they are being helped.”
• And after years of compounding cost increases, a lot of good operators have simply had enough.

What struck me most is that this isn’t just about financial strain, although that strain is enormous. It is fatigue from just being in business, and a frustration and a sense of being unheard by decision-makers, that is compounding on operators.

We are not only seeing rising insolvencies across the general freight sector. We are seeing capable, compliant, long-standing rural operators giving up right across the country.

And I say this openly: I was one of them.

For me personally, those conversations were grounding. They reminded me, very clearly, why we must keep pushing harder to get these messages into the right rooms. Why we need to show governments what this really looks like on the ground.

I’ll be honest:

When the cost of living on everyday Australians was supposed to be the headline priority of the last federal election, how have we ended up with this level of disconnect between government decisions and the realities faced by hard-working people in our communities?

Why We Oppose Another 6%
Our members are operating through the toughest economic environment in recent memory. Insolvencies in the transport sector have more than doubled in two years.
Payment defaults are rising, driver shortages continue to worsen, and profit margins for many operators sit at or near zero.
In this context, a fourth 6% hike is not just another line item. It is the point at which otherwise viable businesses are leaving the industry.
We are recommending that ministers cap any 2026–27 increase at 3%. This is still painful, but governments are preparing to replace the charging model anyway.

So, how can they justify such a huge increase when the model they are using is out of date, even by their own acknowledgement.

PAYGO Is an Outdated System Driving the Wrong Outcomes
A central message of our submission is that the PAYGO model no longer reflects the real world.
PAYGO simply averages past road expenditure - including megaproject blowouts and flood rebuilds - and pushes those costs into heavy vehicle charges. It does not ask:

In practice, PAYGO turns spikes in government spending into structural increases in operator costs.
Rural operators, who depend on lower-standard regional and local roads, end up paying for metropolitan upgrades they will never use.

This is not fairness. This is not cost recovery.
It is an outdated formula being stretched far beyond what it was designed to do.

A Better Model Is Coming — and ALRTA is at the Table
This week ALRTA met with the NTC to discuss the upcoming Forward-Looking Cost Base (FLCB) — the future model intended to replace PAYGO.

While there is still much work to do, early indications are encouraging:

• It is forward-looking, not backward-looking, with a forecasted spend measured against actual spend to ensure some level of transparency.
• It is based on what it actually costs to provide road services over the life of the asset, not on project spend washed through over a short period of recovery.
• It reflects real-world asset life, depreciation and service levels.
• It could create a more stable, predictable pricing path.
• It links revenue to actual road outcomes, not just expenditure.

We will bring members a full update on FLCB discussions in February/March 2026 once the consultation material is released. As always, the devil will be in the detail, and we will be pushing hard to ensure rural and livestock freight is treated as the essential service it is.

Transparency: Show Us Where the Money Goes
A major theme of our submission is the need for real transparency around how heavy vehicle revenue is spent.
In September we called for a National Road-Spend Dashboard - a simple, public tool showing:

• how much road user revenue is collected,
• where it is allocated,
• which roads receive investment,
• and how project delivery is tracking against commitments.
  

Road users deserve to know how their charges translate into actual road improvements. If governments expect operators to absorb increases year after year, they should be held to the same standard of transparency and accountability that we as an industry are now held through compliance and oversight.

Rural Freight Is Essential - and Must Be Treated That Way

Our submission makes one point absolutely clear:

Rural and livestock transport is an essential service sector.
When our trucks stop:

• livestock welfare is compromised
• Food supply falls behind
• Feedlots can’t move stock
• Grain can’t reach ports
• Supermarkets see supply delays
• Farmers face increased production costs
• Regional communities lose critical freight capability
  

These tasks cannot be postponed, substituted, or outsourced to metropolitan carriers. They support Australia’s food and fibre system every hour of every day. Charging decisions must reflect that reality.

A Strong Submission, Backed by Strong Work

Finally, I want to acknowledge the outstanding work of ALRTA’s General Manager of Policy & Strategy, Ashley Mackinnon, in preparing this submission.
Ashley has brought together:

• detailed economic and insolvency data
• a deep understanding of rural freight
• clear policy logic based upon facts
• stakeholder insights
• and ALRTA’s long-term reform priorities

… to deliver one of our strongest, most credible charging submissions to date.

Members can be confident that ALRTA is punching well above its weight and that our voice is being heard at the national level.

In Summary

• We have opposed the proposed 6% increase for 2026–27.
• We have recommended a 3% increase as a transitional step.
• We have highlighted 19%+ in cumulative increases already hitting operators.
• We are pushing for a fairer, forward-looking model to replace PAYGO.
• We are advancing transparency reforms, including a National Road-Spend Dashboard.
• We are working directly with the NTC on the detail in the FLCB.
• And we are making it clear that rural freight is essential and cannot absorb continuous cost increases.

Together, we will continue advocating for a fair, sustainable and transparent charging system that protects the operators who keep Australia’s food and fibre supply chains moving.

Until next week - stay safe.

Anthony

Together, we are stronger.

Our Trusted Partners