Differences between these regulatory systems mean that national transport operators can face inconsistent regulations, creating unnecessary inefficiency and cost.
As the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act[2] did not specify Federal control over road transport, it effectively relinquished full jurisdiction of that area to the States.
[3] Known as the Hughes & Vale case, they eventually led a successful constitutional challenge in the High Court which opened-up the development of interstate road transport and Australia in general.
[13] High priority issues targeted for rail regulatory reform included the establishment of a framework to improve and strengthen the co-regulatory system including application of mutual recognition, and the development of a national policy on key safety issues such as fatigue, testing for drugs and alcohol and medical fitness of safety-critical rail workers.
The long term intention was for functions of the NTAC to be transferred through to the National Transport Commission after three years if agreed upon unanimously by the ATC.
A steering committee was appointed in January 2009 to conduct a review and delivered its final report to the Chair of the Australian Transport Council (ATC, the predecessor to SCOTI) in August 2009.
Key recommendations which were endorsed included:[citation needed] The commission's early projects led to major gains in many areas of road transport, particularly in the heavy vehicle sector.
Widely praised early reforms delivered included charges, registration, dangerous goods, licensing, vehicle standards and mass and access.