MOTOR VEHICLES (MISCELLANEOUS) AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 14 November 2007. Page 1614.)

Dr McFETRIDGE (Morphett) (16:29): As the opposition's lead speaker on this bill, I indicate that the opposition supports the bill with the amendment that was made in the other place. I understand that the government has agreed to that amendment (and I am sure I will find out from the minister if that is not the case).

The bill aims to close several administrative loopholes that were identified by the Driver Penalty Enforcement Taskforce (DPET). This task force was set up in 2005 and included representatives from SAPOL (South Australia Police), the Courts Administration Authority, the Attorney-General's Department, the Department for Transport, and the Motor Accident Commission. DPET was tasked with identifying loopholes in the current driver licensing laws that currently allow drivers to avoid the law. The bill reflects the recommendations of DPET that relate to the Motor Vehicles Act 1959.

Under the current act, when a notice of disqualification is issued it is sent to the licence holder by ordinary post. The licence holder is assumed to have received the notice. Many drivers continue to drive after being disqualified. If they are apprehended by the police or appear before a court for driving without a licence, they can then claim that they did not receive the notice of disqualification and, thereby, avoid prosecution or conviction. The number who make such a claim in any court is estimated to be between 1,500 and 2,000 people a year.

The cases where police decide not to prosecute are not added into these estimates. Certainly, members of the police force to whom I have spoken in the course of my duties have indicated to me that people claiming not to have received notices of disqualification is a bane of their life and they are looking forward to having a bill such as this presented. I congratulate the government on introducing the bill.

Registered post is not considered to be a viable alternative, as drivers are likely to decline registered items if they suspect that they may be disqualification notices. The bill proposes to force licence holders to take a notice of disqualification through a three-stage process. First, a letter is sent requiring the licence holder to surrender their licence to a specified location, such as a Department of Transport customer service centre, to provide proof of identification and to pay a fee, expected to be about $24. If the holder of the licence does not respond to that letter, the notice of disqualification will be served on them personally by a process server and they will be liable for a fee, expected to be about $60.

If personally serving the notice is unsuccessful, the licence holder's licence will still be disqualified, and the Registrar of Motor Vehicles has the power to refuse to enter into transactions with the licence holder—for example, they will not be able to renew their car registration. If the person comes into contact with the police, they are able to serve the notice on them immediately.

The other point that the bill addresses is the commencement of demerit points. Under the current legislation, the demerit points accrued for a driving offence apply only once the offence has been expiated or settled in court, rather than from the time that the offence was committed. Some drivers use this to manipulate the system where they have licences or conditions limited by time.

For example, a person who is caught committing a road traffic offence shortly before they are due to progress from their provisional licence (P1 or P2) to a full licence can delay the expiation of the offence and thus delay the accrual of demerit points until after they have progressed to their full licence. By doing so, they can avoid the consequences of accruing demerit points while they have a provisional licence. The bill changes the accrual of the demerit points to the time at which the offence was committed.

The issue of concurrent penalties has been addressed. With the introduction of the graduated licensing system, it became possible to be disqualified for driving offences other than those attracting demerit points—for example, breaching certain provisions of a learner's permit. Currently, if a licence holder attracts more than one disqualification not relating to demerit points, the licence holder can serve both periods of disqualification concurrently, effectively avoiding one or more of the disqualification periods. If the disqualification periods relate to normal road traffic offences, this is not possible. The bill addresses this anomaly by bringing the provisions into line with the standard disqualification provisions, which prevent disqualification periods from being served concurrently.

With respect to offences outside the state, currently, if a holder of a South Australian licence commits an offence outside South Australia and enforcement in that jurisdiction results in the suspension or cancellation of a licence, the South Australian Registrar of Motor Vehicles must cancel the licence, even if the penalty for the offence in the other jurisdiction is less than cancellation. The bill gives the registrar the discretion to suspend the licence rather than cancel it.

There is another issue with respect to foreign licence holders. This amendment relates to the commonwealth immigration requirements. Under the current South Australian legislation, a holder of a foreign driver's licence is allowed to continue driving on their foreign licence for three months after they receive their permanent residence visa, after which time they must apply for a South Australian licence.

Changes in the commonwealth immigration arrangements mean that many permanent resident visas may be granted before the recipient arrives in Australia, which means that migrants may have less than three months to obtain a South Australian licence. The bill seeks to provide fairness to permanent resident visa holders by allowing them to drive on their foreign licence for three months after they arrive in Australia rather than from the time they receive their visas.

The amendment that was moved in the upper house related to clause 14. It changed the fine for not notifying one's personal detail changes, such as postal address changes, from $1,250 to $250, which is the same as for other notification offences. The opposition supports the bill.

Mr PEDERICK (Hammond) (16:35): I also support the bill. There is an amazing amount of common-sense in this bill, which we do not see in all bills presented to this place. I would like to congratulate the members of the task force, who worked through issues that would eliminate loopholes in the legislation, which have frustrated the police force. I think people have used it as an excuse to say that they had not received the notice or that they had lost their licence just to suit their own ends. I think that the three-stage process will help to tighten up that procedure down the track.

With respect to demerit points, that only happens once the matter has been settled, but I think that bringing it back to the time when the offence is committed will be a lot simpler for everyone to work out when their points are to be renewed over time. It makes a lot of commonsense that, if someone is picked up for an offence, they can, under instruction from the police officer, work out how many points they will lose from that day forth, instead of having to wait to receive the notice or attend a court down the track. I also applaud the idea of not having concurrent disqualification periods, and it will certainly make people take more notice of the Road Traffic Act generally.

In relation to the point about foreign licence holders, I think there is a great deal of common sense shown in the bill, with people given more time when they visit this country to obtain their South Australian licence after they get to Australia, instead of from the time they get their visa when they are overseas. With those few words, I indicate that I support the bill and commend it with the amendments from the other place.

The Hon. J.D. LOMAX-SMITH (Adelaide—Minister for Education and Children's Services, Minister for Tourism, Minister for the City of Adelaide) (16:38): I thank members opposite for their support of this bill. Clearly, it tidies up some inconsistencies and incongruities. There were loopholes that some people had exploited, and the changes that are sought in this legislation tidy those up and make it simpler for people migrating to Australia who had the problem of having a period of grace that could expire before they come to the country, so that the period of grace only starts when they land. The issues that have been discussed by the members for Hammond and Morphett are very important issues that we need to tidy up, so I thank them for their support. I thank the opposition for its commitment to these reforms.

Bill read a second time and taken through its remaining stages.

Mrs GERAGHTY: Mr Speaker, I draw your attention to the state of the house.

A quorum having been formed: