Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure, $860,577,000

Administered Items for the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure, $9,208,000

Minister:

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

Departmental Advisers:

Ms L. Williams, Deputy Commissioner, South Australia Police.

Mr I. Hartman, Manager, Financial Management Services Branch, South Australia Police.

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

Ms F. Cartwright, Acting Manager, Safety Strategy, Safety and Policy Programs, Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure.

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

Mr M. Hanton, Manager, Road Safety, Communications and Engagement, Motor Accident Commission.

The CHAIR: I welcome the Minister for Road Safety to the table. I declare the proposed payments open for examination and refer members to the Agency Statements, Volume 3. I invite the minister to introduce his primary advisers.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: On my right is Mr Paul Gelston, Chief Operating Officer, DPTI; on my left is Linda Williams, Deputy Commissioner, SAPOL; and on her left is Fiona Cartwright, Manager, Safety Strategy, Safety and Policy Programs, DPTI. 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, to fewer than 80 fatalities and 800 serious injuries respectively.

South Australia has achieved substantial reductions in the fatality rate over the last decade, from 7.5 fatalities per 100,000 of population in 2006 to 5.1 in 2016. In 2016, South Australia recorded its lowest road toll on record, with 86 fatalities, and that was 16 fewer than 102 fatalities recorded in the year prior. Notwithstanding that, 86 fatalities is still too many.

While much attention is given to fatalities, serious crashes can often result in permanent injury to the victim and have substantial impacts on their families and friends and on the community in general. Preliminary figures indicate that there were 692 serious injuries on South Australian roads for 2016. The total cost of road crashes of all severities in South Australia during 2016 was $1.5 billion.

The decline in road trauma has been achieved despite a steadily rising population and growth in the number of motor vehicles and the number of licensed drivers. Despite these reductions, it is no time for complacency because even one death on our roads is one too many. The government remains committed to continuing to undertake a range of road safety initiatives.

The Motor Accident Commission, South Australia Police and emergency services continue to work alongside the Department of Planning, Transport and Infrastructure and the community to play a pivotal role in raising awareness of key road safety issues, including the importance of enforcement, engineering and infrastructure initiatives, emergency services and education. I should also add that the Motor Accident Commission has a vital function in this as well.

In 2017-18, the Community Road Safety Fund will provide $81 million to reduce fatalities and serious injuries on our roads. Shoulder sealing and audio tactile line marking will continue on rural roads, with $10 million allocated in 2017-18 and $40 million spent over the four-year period between 2015-16 and 2018-19. Other infrastructure works include safety improvements at railway pedestrian and level crossings as part of an initial $12 million investment in the state government's Railway Crossing Safety Strategy.

In an Australian first, state-of-the-art technology that triggers safety measures when vehicles are detected approaching intersections will be installed at four rural intersections. Research shows that the impact of road trauma can be substantially reduced with every reduction in vehicle speed, and the Rural Intersection Active Warning System is able to reduce the speed limit when it detects vehicles approaching an intersection. Excess or inappropriate travel speed was a contributing factor in 25 per cent of fatal crashes last year. Ten safety cameras will be installed at priority locations to reduce casualty crashes.

Drug driving is also a growing road safety risk. The government is taking a low tolerance or zero tolerance approach to drug driving, with legislation currently before the parliament proposing a three-month loss of licence for first time offenders, along with increased disqualification periods for repeat offenders and a new offence of drug/high-level drink-driving with a child under the age of 16 in the car. The government has extended funding to the University of Adelaide Centre for Automotive Safety Research (CASR) for its world-renowned road safety research. The funding will allow CASR to carry out research relevant to the specific road safety needs of South Australia.

On the Right Track Remote, a driver licensing program for Aboriginal people in the APY lands and also the Maralinga lands, continues to deliver outcomes. Prior to the program's commencement, the licensing rate across all licence types, including learner's permits for Aboriginal people living in the APY and MT lands, was 17 per cent compared with 89 per cent of the state's overall population. The licensing rate for Aboriginal people on the lands has now more than doubled to approximately 36 per cent across all licence types.

Engaging with local communities around road safety issues is vital to achieving improvements in road safety outcomes. The Residents Win program 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. In 2016-17, 18 projects were funded with a total value of $1,410,849 through partnerships with councils and communities. This government is committed to implementing reforms, maintaining enforcement and funding research to further reduce road trauma.

Mr KNOLL: If I could start off in relation to your answer around the 10 additional safety cameras, have locations for those been decided?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: I am advised that the selection process has commenced, in accordance with the criteria that the department contemplates when it comes to the locations of these devices. I am not sure if this has been stated publicly yet or not. It might be an announcement. The government has decided that five of the 10 locations will be at school safety crossings and the other five will be in the usual locations in accordance with the criteria.

Mr KNOLL: When are those cameras likely to be installed?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: The objective is for this financial year.

Mr KNOLL: Will they be installed by 30 June or will they be installed this calendar year? Is there any more detail?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: My advice is this financial year. That could mean earlier, but the objective is to get it done this financial year.

Mr KNOLL: You are being very coy on dates, minister. Can I ask how much money was spent on the shoulder sealing program in 2016-17? I heard that it was $10 million in 2017-18.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: My advice is that the allocation is $10 million per year for four years.

Mr KNOLL: Has the money for 2017-18 been allocated?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: In terms of locations?

Mr KNOLL: Yes.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: I am advised that the department does have a schedule for those shoulder sealing works for the remainder of the financial year, yes.

Mr KNOLL: Can you provide them? You do not have to read them out now.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: I will have to take it on notice.

Mr KNOLL: Can I ask about the State Black Spot program and how much was spent in 2016-17?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: In 2016-17, the state government invested $9.8 million to treat 21 blackspot locations across the state.

Mr KNOLL: What is the allocation for 2017-18?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: I am advised that in 2017-18, the state government has allocated a further $8.5 million for blackspot funding projects. Just for a bit more information, the Australian government has also allocated an additional $6.2 million.

Ms REDMOND: Could I ask a couple of questions in relation to the minister's introductory remarks? You mentioned that the total cost of motor vehicle accidents was $1.5 billion. I was just wondering how that figure was arrived at? My experience with serious accidents is that it may be many, many years after an accident before a compensation package is determined because it takes so long for people to get over it and the court proceedings and so on. Is that cost simply the cost of original attendance and hospitalisation and so on, or is it some sort of overview of what the ultimate figure is, and how does it come to each year?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: It is an estimated cost figure, and it is determined by a national model that was established pretty recently, I think—in the last few years. It is based on the willingness to pay.

Ms REDMOND: Sorry, it is based on what?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: Willingness to pay, it is called. It is a model that was set up in New South Wales initially. It is a national model. It is based on the community's willingness to pay to avoid death or injury due to a road crash. It reflects the monetary cost of illness, injury and death, the impacts on quality of life, sense of security from being safe and also a person's assessment of their risk to life due to using the road. It is a model that seeks to come up with a figure that reflects the community's willingness to pay in the context of a road crash. It is a very difficult—

Ms REDMOND: I may have to ask for some sort of briefing on how that works.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: Sure; I am happy to take that on notice and provide that information.

The Hon. P. CAICA: On page 132 of Budget Paper 4, Activity indicators, it has, 'No. of detections as a percentage of the number of vehicles passing mobile speed cameras'. Underneath that it has, 'No. of detections as a percentage of the number of vehicles passing fixed speed cameras'. Just for my information, the point-to-point cameras that measure average speed over a distance, are they included within the fixed camera percentages?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: My advice is that they would be. They are a far smaller number in comparison just by virtue of the fact there is a far smaller number of point-to-point cameras. They are more expensive. I think point-to-point cameras are a fantastic innovation in terms of achieving the desired outcome of people not speeding.

The Hon. P. CAICA: They certainly work for me.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: That says a lot. My advice is they are probably included within those numbers, but for the sake of accuracy we will take that on notice as well.

Mr KNOLL: Page 101, fees income: can I ask what the amount of money received from mobile speed cameras was in 2016-17? By that I mean speed cameras that are either attached to the vehicle or placed on the side of the road when the vehicle is sitting there.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: Are you after the dollar figure—

Mr KNOLL: The dollar figure.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: —or the number of detections?

Mr KNOLL: I am going to ask questions around the fixed cameras, the average speed cameras and mid-block intersection cameras, so if there is a total figure for all speeding and red light fine income, I am happy to take that and also have it broken down into whatever categories you break it down into.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: This is more of a SAPOL question in other respects, so I am grateful for Mr Hartmann's advice here. Were you after the 2016-17 actuals?

Mr KNOLL: Yes.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: The 2016-17 actual for mobile speed cameras, I am advised, is $15.3 million and for fixed cameras, it is $26.8 million. I am advised that that would include red light. Unregistered and uninsured would be $5.5 million. For point-to-point cameras, it is $900,000. That might help the member for Colton, in terms of understanding how many people get caught by those. Did you want me to continue with other revenue in terms of fines?

Mr KNOLL: Yes, definitely.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: For traffic infringements, it is $13.8 million; and for other, $6.8 million.

Mr KNOLL: Traffic infringements are where a police officer pulls you over for speeding?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: Yes, that is my advice.

Mr KNOLL: And that is the sum of all money that goes into the CRSF?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: No. The figures I have just provided are provided in the context of SAPOL's advice regarding respective fine sources, not necessarily the funds that go into the Community Road Safety Fund. That is a distinct question.

Mr KNOLL: Maybe if I ask this in a slightly different way. In 2015-16—and 2016-17, I am sure, will come out soon—the appropriation or revenue from anti-speeding devices was $81 million. I am keen to get a breakdown of where that money comes from. It can be definitional, as in, it is these speeding fines, but not these other ones.

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: You are going to a point here that I think is worth my articulating if we are talking about this thing. My advice is that the amount of money that goes into the Community Road Safety Fund does include moneys raised from speed cameras but exceeds that amount. In terms of 2017-18, the Community Road Safety Fund will receive $81 million, is my advice, but that number exceeds, although it includes, the amount raised by speed cameras.

It is an important distinction. I have been at pains to try to explain this to the community because I think there is a perception that money raised by speed cameras goes into general revenue and exceeds the amount that is spent on road safety when, in actual fact, it is the total opposite. My advice is that the total amount of money going to the Community Road Safety Fund exceeds the amount of money raised from speed cameras.

Mr KNOLL: That is the crux of what I am trying to get to. Clarity is good thing. Let me ask just one more question: is there any type of traffic fine infringement—whether it be speeding, red light or, as you mentioned, unregistered—that does not go into the CRSF?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: My advice is that all speeding fine revenue goes into the Community Road Safety Fund.

Mr KNOLL: So, red light cameras also go into the CRSF?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: No. To be clear, as it stands all revenue raised from speed cameras automatically goes into the Community Road Safety Fund. In respect of red light cameras, the question is somewhat superfluous in context of the fact that more money gets allocated to the Community Road Safety Fund than what is raised in any event. So, it is—

Mr KNOLL: It is another ESL, I understand. That makes sense.

Ms REDMOND: I have a couple of questions about driver training, in particular. I will just background the question by explaining that I spent 10 years on the Road Safety Advisory Council, so I am reasonably well aware of the statistics about young drivers and so on. I have also raised three children and paid for others to train them because I believed I should not pass on my bad driving habits.

There are two things I will comment on. The first is that those who set themselves up as trainers of young drivers do not seem to be adequately equipped. My personal experience in that regard is that after my children got their licences I had to teach them about reading the reflectors on the road at night, knowing to pull back a gear if you are going to pass a vehicle and sitting well back from it with a large vehicle, driving at very low speeds in car parks, all sorts of things like that. So, I am really curious about that aspect of how we determine who can set themselves up as a trainer of drivers and put them through the licensing process.

More importantly, as an overall view I would say—and it is apparent anecdotally—that kids growing up in the country are largely very competent in handling vehicles, because they usually have paddock-bashers from an early age and are quite competent about what the vehicle will do, but they do not know anything about traffic behaviour. Conversely, kids growing up in the city tend to have a good understanding of traffic behaviour because they have been driven everywhere—apparently no child can walk further than 400 metres to go to school—but very little competence when it comes to the behaviour of the vehicle. I wonder whether any thought has been given as to how to better inform each of those groups in terms of what might be done to make them safer once they do become licensed drivers.

The CHAIR: While you are conferring, minister, the omnibus questions will be read into the Hansard.

Mr KNOLL: I will read the omnibus questions:

1. Will the minister provide a detailed breakdown of expenditure on consultants and contractors above $10,000 in 2016-17 for all departments and agencies reporting to the minister, listing the name of the consultant, contractor or service supplier, cost, work undertaken and method of appointment?

2. In financial year 2016-17 for all departments and agencies reporting to the minister, what underspending on projects and programs (1) was and (2) was not approved by cabinet for carryover expenditure in 2017-18?

3. For each department and agency reporting to the minister, please provide a breakdown of attraction, retention and performance allowances, as well as non-salary benefits, paid to public servants and contractors in the years 2015-16 and 2016-17.

4. For each agency for which the minister has responsibility:

(a) How many FTEs were employed to provide communication and promotion activities in 2016-17 and what was their employment expense?

(b) How many FTEs are budgeted to provide communication and promotion activities in 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21, and what is their estimated employment expense?

(c) The total cost of government-paid advertising, including campaigns, across all mediums, in 2016-17, and budgeted cost for 2017-18.

5. For each agency for which the minister has responsibility:

(a) What was the cost of electricity in 2016-17?

(b) What is the budgeted cost of electricity in 2017-18?

(c) What is the provisioned cost of electricity in 2018-19, 2019-20 and, 2020-21?

6. For each grant program or fund the minister is responsible for please provide the following information for the 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21 financial years:

(a) Balance of the grant program or fund;

(b) Budgeted (or actual) expenditure from the program or fund;

(c) Budgeted (or actual) payments into the program or fund;

(d) Carryovers into or from the program or fund; and

(e) Details, including the value and beneficiary, of any commitments already made to be funded from the program or fund.

The CHAIR: Minister, do you have an answer to the member for Heysen's question?

The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: It is probably not as detailed as she would like, so I am happy to undertake to get additional information, apart from saying that I am advised and aware of the fact that there is a robust auditing process that driver trainers have to undertake in order to be able to provide that service to the community. We think it is a process that stands the community in relatively good stead, notwithstanding the concerns raised by the member for Heysen. As part of that, it should also be noted that the competency-based training programs require drivers to go through different scenarios, which may take into account the differences in the scenarios that the member refers to. However, I am more than happy to undertake to get a bit more information for the member for Heysen, if she would like that.

The CHAIR: Excellent. With that, I thank the minister for his time today, and I thank all of his advisers for all their hard work. With no further questions, I declare the examination of the proposed payments referred to committee A.

Sitting suspended from 14:46 to 14:59.