Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure, $806,024,000

Administered Items for the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure, $9,719,000

Membership:

Mr Pisoni substituted for Mr Goldsworthy.

Minister:

Hon. P. Malinauskas, Minister for Police, Minister for Correctional Services, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Road Safety.

Departmental Advisers:

Cmmr G. Stevens, Commissioner of Police, South Australia Police.

Mr I. Hartmann, Manager, Financial Management Services, South Australia Police.

Mr B. Cagialis, Chief Finance Officer, Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure.

Mr P. Gelston, Chief Operating Officer, Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure.

Ms F. Cartwright, Acting Safety Policy Unit Manager, Strategic and Corporate Communications, Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure.

Mr L. Golding, Chief of Staff.

The CHAIR: We are going to open the portfolio, Planning, Transport and Infrastructure. We are going to have the Minister for Road Safety appear before us. I declare the proposed payments open for examination and refer members to the Agency Statements in Volume 3 of Budget Paper 4. I call upon the minister to make an opening statement if he wishes to do so, after he has introduced his advisers.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: Let me just start by introducing those people who are here. On my right we have again the Commissioner of Police, Mr Grant Stevens. On my left is Fiona Cartwright, who is the manager for Safety Strategy, Safety and Policy Programs from DPTI. On her left is Mr Paul Gelston, the Chief Operating Officer at DPTI. Behind me on my left I have Mr Bill Cagialis, the chief finance officer of DPTI, and on his right is Mr Ian Hartmann, who is the manager of Financial Management Services at SAPOL. Again, on the far left behind me is Mr Liam Golding, who is my chief of staff.

The CHAIR: Do you have an opening statement?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: South Australia's road safety strategy 2020, Towards Zero Together, has set a target to reduce road fatalities and serious injuries by at least 30 per cent by 2020. South Australia has achieved substantial reductions in the fatality rate over the last decade from 7.5 fatalities per 100,000 population in 2006 to a rate of six in 2015.

In 2015, 102 people were killed in road crashes on South Australian roads. This is six less than the 108 fatalities recorded in 2014, but is 22 fatalities more than South Australia’s road safety target of less than 80 fatalities by 2020. The main decrease in fatalities was seen in rural areas, which were nine less in 2015 compared to 2014. A further 759 people incurred serious injuries as a result of road crashes on South Australian roads in 2015, an increase from the 711 serious injuries recorded in 2014.

In the last four years (2012-15), the number of serious injuries has remained below South Australia’s target of less than 800 serious injuries by 2020. A large number of casualty crashes continue to occur at intersections in both urban and rural areas and single vehicle crashes, such as a vehicle rolling over or leaving the road and hitting trees, still account for the majority of fatal crashes in rural areas. But all these numbers remain too high, as a single fatality or serious injury takes an incredible toll on families and whole communities.

In 2016-17, the Community Road Safety Fund will provide $84.14 million to reduce fatalities and serious injuries on our roads. This will include $32.85 million of projects under the asset improvement program to prevent or mitigate crashes and improve safety for all road users. Two-thirds of the asset improvement projects funded by the Community Road Safety Fund will improve safety on rural roads.

Shoulder sealing and audio tactile line marking will continue on rural roads, with $10 million allocated in 2016-17 and $40 million to be spent over the four-year period 2015-16 to 2018-19. Works to improve safety for motorcyclists in the outer metropolitan area will continue, with $400,000 allocated in 2016-17. Other infrastructure works include safety improvements at rail level crossings and safety improvements at road junctions and sections where there has been a history of casualty crashes.

Working with and alongside the community to engage in road safety improvements is vital. An example of this is the Residents Win program, which provides communities with direct access to funding ($500,000 a year over four years), enabling them to be involved in creating people friendly streets and safer roads. This program has received more than 150 expressions of interest and funded a diverse range of projects in metropolitan Adelaide and regional South Australia.

On the Right Track Remote, a driver licensing program for Aboriginal people in the APY and Maralinga lands continues to deliver positive outcomes, with almost 40 per cent of age-eligible people as clients and the number of full licence holders expected to more than triple within 12 months since the program commenced in February 2015. Importantly, I am advised the program is well regarded and appreciated by the communities it is serving.

In addition to redressing the imbalance between licensing rates for Aboriginal people in remote communities and those of non-Aboriginal South Australians, there is a strong focus on safety as drivers and passengers. As we move forward and work towards reducing the road toll even further, we will continue to work closely with the South Australian community. Every one of us has to play a role in improving road safety. We must continue to strive for the best possible results and this requires a concerted effort from every road user.

Mr PISONI: I have a few questions about the Description/objective on page 100 of Budget Paper 4, volume 3. Picking up on your comments in your introductory remarks in relation to the number of deaths per 100,000, are you able to give us a breakdown as to regional versus metropolitan?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: Yes. For the 2015 calendar year, I am advised that there were 43—this is total numbers—metro fatalities and 59 rural fatalities. In terms of breaking that down on a per capita basis around residents, I do not have that figure at hand, but I am happy to take it on notice.

Mr PISONI: The maths is there, so that is okay. I refer you to the table of expenses, income and FTEs. Obviously the financial commentary explains that there has been some transfer in expenses:

the transfer of functions reported under program 6 Infrastructure Planning and Management in 2015-16 budget to program 7 Road Safety…

Can you explain what the program delivers and the reasons for the transfer?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: I am advised that the $1.6 million was towards the state and national Black Spot funding.

Mr PISONI: That is an infrastructure spend that has been transferred from DPTI to a road safety program; is that right?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: Yes, I think that is correct.

Mr PISONI: And the reason for that?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: I seek to avoid this whenever I can, but I think this is best taken on notice to ensure that we can give you the most accurate answer.

Mr PISONI: Then:

the transfer of functions reported under program 4 Roads and Marine in 2015-16 budget to program 7 Road Safety ($1.1 million).

Can you explain the functions of that program? I suspect that is also Black Spot, is it?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: For the sake of not chewing up your time, I think in this particular instance I would be happy to take that on notice to ensure that you get the precise answer you are looking for.

Mr PISONI: Can we do that for the next lot of dot points? There is another one at point 6. I do not know whether they are the same figures. Are they just a repeat of the same thing on the next page?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: I am advised that the answer to that is yes.

Mr PISONI: Alright, can we have those back?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: Sure.

Mr PISONI: There was a total cost of providing road safety services in the 2014-15 year of just over $47 million. Is there a percentage of that money that comes from the emergency services levy?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: I am advised no.

Mr PISONI: Is the 2016-17 financial year the same? Does that have any emergency services levy money in it?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: I am advised that is the same again, that no money from the ESL is allocated in that 2016-17 year either.

Mr PISONI: I will take you to Targets 2016-17 on page 101, Introduce legislation to strengthen drug driving penalties. Are you able to advise when that is likely to happen, and what changes are we expected to see?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: I am happy to provide a brief update on that. As I have stated publicly, upon taking on the responsibility, something that I have found rather alarming, in both a road safety context and in a policing context, is the volume of people who are delivering positive drug testing results. These numbers seem to be on the increase and it is a source of community concern, and certainly concern from my perspective, particularly in light of the risks attached to drug driving.

I have seen figures that in the order of 24 per cent of people who have died on our roads in recent times have delivered a positive drug result. In light of that, I have undertaken an effort to see if we cannot enhance or improve the way we deal with drug driving in terms of the penalty regime, but also around the services that we attach to that. I have asked the department, in conjunction with SAPOL, to undertake a significant piece of work on that. It remains ongoing, and I certainly hope within coming weeks to be taking a proposition to cabinet.

The cabinet process not having ensued, obviously I am not at liberty to speak about this authoritatively as government policy, but what I can and am happy to reiterate is what I have stated publicly, that is, a substantial piece of work is being undertaken. To be frank, I would have liked to have already introduced that to cabinet, but it is important that we get this right. I am looking forward to taking something to cabinet in coming weeks.

Mr PISONI: On drug driving, there were a number of road safety ads that I saw, earlier in the year I think, that were talking about drug driving. They are still on the MAC site, but I have not seen them elsewhere for quite some time. They were talking about drug testing and that the THC in cannabis is detectable for at least five hours. I had some feedback through my office that people found that confusing. It was particularly difficult for a constituent of Mr Pengilly's in Finniss, who was obviously a regular user of marijuana who always waited 24 hours before he drove, and after seeing that ad, drove after five hours. I have not seen that ad very often since then. Of course, he was done for drug driving. Are you able to explain where the five hours came from, and what level of impairment somebody will have five hours after THC use?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: With drug testing, as distinct from testing for alcohol, there is no impairment-based test in respect of drug driving. It is simply a presence-based test in respect of drug driving. I understand that MAC did receive substantial research that underpinned that advertising campaign, as one would reasonably suspect. I am happy to take that on notice and provide more information around the research that underpinned that campaign and the arguments behind it.

I am happy to provide that information after taking it on notice, but I would just say, generally speaking, regarding the individual concerned who was a regular user, that, at the expense of sounding simplistic, it is important to remember that marijuana remains a prohibited substance in the state of South Australia and, indeed, Australia at large, and my strong advice to the community would be to do everything they can to stop the use of marijuana so as to mitigate their risk of breaking the law.

Mr PISONI: I could not agree more, minister, but your MAC ads do not actually point out that it is illegal to use either amphetamines or marijuana.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: MAC's advertising is undertaken with a very specific objective of trying to improve road safety and I think, by and large, MAC has an outstanding record in delivering sophisticated well-researched public campaigns that have, undoubtedly, made a substantial contribution to road safety in South Australia. I do not see it as MAC's responsibility to be advising the public around drug policy. It is very much SAPOL's task to deal with policing. MAC's objectives are very different, but I would have thought that it was a statement of the obvious that substances such as cannabis and amphetamines remain illegal in South Australia.

Mr PISONI: Was there any advice sought by police or your department in using the five-hour claim in that advertising campaign?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: As before, in respect to the research that sits behind that campaign, which I am advised was well thought through and thorough, I am happy to take on notice information regarding that research and share it accordingly.

Mr PISONI: You will provide the research?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: What I have said I have taken on notice are the questions around the research that sits behind the campaign. I cannot think of any reason why the research that underpinned that campaign, in terms of the conclusions that it resulted in, if it is appropriate to raise them publicly, should not be shared. I do not see any objection to that.

Mr PISONI: Has your department received any complaints about the information given in that campaign?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: When you say department, is that SAPOL or DPTI?

Mr PISONI: Your portfolio of road safety goes over two—

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: I certainly do not recall receiving anything from either agency, and I have just been advised by each of them that they do not recall receiving any complaints along those lines either.

Mr PISONI: Did the media campaign with that ad run its full booked course?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: I believe that was the case. I have just been advised by MAC.

Mr PISONI: Are there plans to run it again?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: I am advised that there are currently plans or schedules for those campaigns to be run twice again this financial year.

Mr PISONI: Will they be run without changes?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: I am advised that there are not currently any plans to change the advertising campaign but, of course, MAC, like any good organisation, is constantly reviewing itself and its campaigns and if any evidence were to be presented that caused that to be changed, then that option remains available to them. MAC has in the past adjusted campaigns depending on need and advice that they receive in due course, but, as it stands, the existing campaign in its current format is scheduled to run twice again this financial year.

Mr PISONI: Are you comfortable, minister, with advice that states that at least five hours before driving after smoking marijuana?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: I would refer again to that question being taken on notice regarding any research that underpins the campaign.

Mr PISONI: I am happy to say I am not comfortable with that. Are you comfortable with it?

The CHAIR: Order! We have a habit here of listening to the answer before we have the next question, and that is a comment in any case, member for Unley. Would the minister like to finish his answer?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: The member for Unley is entitled to his opinion. What is incumbent upon me as Minister for Road Safety is to satisfy myself that there has been research that has underpinned a campaign and it has not just been plucked out of thin air or is a thought bubble, and I have been advised that such research has been undertaken.

Again, notwithstanding the fact that I acknowledge the concerns of the member for Unley, I think we all share concerns about drug use in the community and there is always a variety of views about how best to address such an issue but, as I stated earlier, it is incumbent on someone in my position to satisfy themselves that research has underpinned the campaign. Of course, if information comes to light that should question that, it would be my expectation that the respective agency, MAC, would adjust their plans accordingly if it was appropriate to do so.

Mr PISONI: Minister, I take you to page 136, Description/objective. You are saying that there is a focus on recidivist dangerous road users. Are you referring to banned drivers in that—

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: Referring to what, sorry?

Mr PISONI: Banned drivers, people who are banned from driving, and people who have had their licences taken away from them? What is the definition of a recidivist dangerous road user and does it extend beyond motor vehicles?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: Again, remind me, whereabouts are you referring to?

Mr PISONI: This is on the top of Sub-program 3.1: Road Use Regulation.

The CHAIR: It is back into Police, but we thought we would give you latitude because it is about road safety in a roundabout sort of way.

Mr PISONI: The portfolio itself is split over two areas.

The CHAIR: There is no need to argue with me; we are giving you the latitude.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: I have just been advised by the police commissioner and neither he nor I am aware of a technical definition underpinning the term 'recidivist' in this particular context, rather that with recidivist dangerous road users it is self-evident who those people are. That being said, I am happy to take on notice whether or not there is a technical definition that underpins the word 'recidivist' in this particular context.

Mr PISONI: Can you count them?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: Can you count recidivists?

Mr PISONI: Are there a number of them? Are they people you are aware of?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: Being a somewhat operational question in nature, I might invite the police commissioner to answer that.

Cmmr STEVENS: Recidivist road traffic offenders are, by definition, people who have a history of driving offences or behaviours on the road that would present a risk to the wider community and it is probably the case that we can count those but it would be somewhat of a moving feast in terms of the number in each local service area at any given time. These would be the sort of people who attract the attention of police in a proactive sense ensuring that they are complying with their obligations in terms of licence disqualification or suspension, or if we have a reason to suspect that they are likely to commit other offences, we would be targeting them in that regard as well.

Mr PISONI: Can you give us an average number?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: When you say an average—

Mr PISONI: I am not asking you the number as of today, but can you give us an average number as to how many would fall into that category, or how many last year for example?

The CHAIR: Lots or a few?

Mr PISONI: No, I actually want to try to get a number.

The CHAIR: Well, it is a bit hard. You just admitted that yourself.

Mr PISONI: With all due respect, Chair, I am asking the question.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: Again, I am happy for the police commissioner to attempt to answer that.

Cmmr STEVENS: I think we could provide you some information that would give an indication as to the number of people that we would consider fit that category across the metropolitan and regional areas.

The CHAIR: We will let him have one more question and then I think we have been as fair as we could possibly be all day.

Mr PISONI: Are you going to bring that back? You do not have that now, is that what you are saying, the figure?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: Yes.

Mr PISONI: This is on the same page, page136. I noticed that you scored some free speed cameras, I think, from the federal government—$1.3 million. There was some media I think I found that they were surplus at a federal situation and they have now been installed in South Australia. Can you give us some more information about those, whether there was any calibration required, whether it is a new system we have introduced, whether we got them because we are using the same system? Page 135 describes 'Resources received free of charge'.

The CHAIR: You said it was the same page.

Mr PISONI: Yes, and that is a description of what the resource free of charge is, Chair, on page 136.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: There is an important premise within your question regarding a reference to federal funding for this, I am advised that there does not appear to be any gifting of cameras from federal agencies. I think the thing you may be referring to on page 136 talks about safety cameras from DPTI. I am happy to take that on notice to double-check that, but I am advised by DPTI that there is no suggestion that DPTI has been in receipt of—

Mr PISONI: It says here—

The CHAIR: Hang on, he is taking it on notice. The time has expired.

Mr PISONI: Page 135 says, 'Resources received free of charge.'

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: I am happy to take that on notice and ensure that DPTI gets you the information.

The CHAIR: The time for questions having expired, I declare the examination of the proposed payments adjourned until tomorrow. I thank the minister and his advisers for their attendance.

At 18:18 the committee adjourned to Tuesday 2 August 2016 at 09:00.