Australia’s New Freight Strategy: Plan or Real Progress?

Australia’s freight lifeline just got another “refreshed” strategy. The Federal Government has re-launched its National Freight and Supply Chain Strategy, promising resilience, productivity, decarbonisation and better data.

An evolving Strategy amid major disruptions

The Strategy first appeared in 2019, before COVID, before the continuous onslaught of floods and fires that have ripped through infrastructure, before trade wars and tariffs spiked volatility. In that time, supply chains have faced relentless disruption. The government has recognised the critical need to resilience and contingency planning. Australia’s freight sector contributes 8.6% of national GDP. Every 1% lift in productivity adds $2 billion. And the freight task is projected to grow 26% by 2050. With those numbers, the stakes couldn’t be higher. Yet other nations have raced ahead with bold investments, whilst the momentum in Australia has lagged. Whilst we plan, other nations are years ahead with actioning.

What the Strategy Promises

The Strategy boils down to four big priorities:

• Productivity: lifting efficiency and international competitiveness. But without clarity on investment, productivity remains a promise, not a pathway.
• Resilience: building supply chains able to withstand shocks. Yet we’ve already seen what floods, fires and derailments can do – so contingency builds are needed.
• Decarbonisation: reducing emissions in line with national targets. A worthy aim, but without incentives, how can businesses already under margin pressure afford the shift?
• Data: strengthening evidence, monitoring and the National Freight Data Hub. Useful, but as many in industry would say: data doesn’t keep freight moving when the highway’s underwater.

All four are critical. But without clear accountability, funding, and delivery mechanisms, the risk is continued delays in the delivery and stemming degradation of vital infrastructure. Is the plan really a plan? What’s missing is the who, how and how much?

When Plans Meet Reality

The government’s 2025–29 Action Plan lists 14 initiatives, including freight modelling and safety research on batteries for zero-emission vehicles. Anyone in freight knows the real cost of disruption:

• Remember the derailment on the Nullarbor?
• Floodwaters cutting highways?
• Fires closing critical rail and road corridors?
• Airports and ports increasing shutdowns due to extreme weather.

These events aren’t hypotheticals. They’ve happened, and they will happen again. The question is: where are the contingencies, and where is the money to build them? Data analysis is useful, yes, but modelling freight flows doesn’t reopen a highway when it’s underwater, and research won’t stop ports from shutting when the wind hits 70km/h. There is shared frustration across the industry: The time of deliberating what is needed is over. Speak with any truck or train driver and they will give you the priorities. Show industry the money to commit to the contingency infrastructure builds.

Falling Behind on the World Stage

While Australia deliberates, others are acting:

• Norway, Sweden and Canada have electric charging roads already in place.
• Asia and Europe are embedding freight into urban and housing planning.
• Competitor economies have spent the last two decades investing in freight networks designed to handle the next fifty years.

Where is Australia in that list?

The Policy-Industry Gap

The government wants to drive decarbonisation. Industry wants to survive tight margins and crippling regulation. Right now, there’s little middle ground. Where are the incentives to invest in alternative assets? Where are the freight policies written into new suburbs and housing estates? Where are the streamlined national regulations to replace the patchwork of state-by-state red tape? Plans are necessary. But contingencies are vital.

What Industry Needs to See

This isn’t about rejecting the Strategy. It’s about demanding the detail that makes it real:

• Funding for contingency infrastructure
• National consistency in regulation
• Incentives that make decarbonisation practical, not punitive
• Accountability for delivery, not just consultation

Until then, Australia risks being left behind while others lock in their competitive advantage.

The Bottom Line

As Minister Catherine King put it: “Without a viable and reliable freight network, Australia stops.” She is absolutely right. Industry knows what’s needed. The priorities are clear. The question is whether government is prepared to move from deliberation to delivery. And how quickly. Until that happens, our supply chains will continue to creak under pressure.