ROAD TRAFFIC (MISCELLANEOUS) AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 8 April 2009. Page 2343.)

Dr McFETRIDGE (Morphett) (12:49): The opposition supports this bill. We will not get through it quite as quickly as the other bills, but it is not contentious. We will raise a couple of issues and, as is their right, some of my colleagues want to make contributions. This bill provides regulation-making powers to enable the introduction of two national heavy vehicle initiatives—the Intelligent Access Program and Heavy Vehicle Speed Compliance Program—and makes several amendments to the requirements for declaration, notification and testing of speed and red light cameras.

Those pieces of legislation—namely, the Intelligent Access Program and the Heavy Vehicle Speed Compliance regulations—are part of a National Transport Commission recommendation. I will speak about those before we move on to the other amendments for the declaration, notification and testing of speed and red light cameras, because some issues have arisen there.

The speeding of any vehicle, as we have been well aware in recent weeks, is an extremely important issue for the community generally, but we are particularly aware of the speeding of heavy vehicles. When a crash involves heavy vehicles, normally it is extremely serious, with a lot of damage and, in many cases, loss of life or injury. In fact, in 2008, in South Australia there were 19 fatalities involving heavy vehicles, and I think that was up from 10 or 12 in the year before. It is an extremely serious issue.

Just yesterday, I was looking at some photographs posted to me by a friend of a truck that had jackknifed on the South Eastern Freeway during the wet weather. That accident could have been far more serious than it was, but a lot of damage was done to the truck, although it may not have been caused by speed but by the road conditions.

No matter what the cause, we need to be aware that when heavy vehicles are involved in accidents, either through speeding or some other reason, there can be a lot of damage. These regulations, which are based on the National Transport Commission regulations, will assist in the enforcement of speeding fines and the monitoring of speeding and heavy vehicles. However, the devil is always in the detail, so I will be interested to see the final outcome.

Over the past three years, the regulations and the legislation relating to heavy vehicles have not only provided for the driver to be made responsible for the outcome of their getting behind the wheel and moving the truck and its load around the place but have also introduced a chain of responsibility. We have seen this before in relation to mass, load restraint and driver fatigue, and we are now seeing it for speeding. I think that is a good thing because people who put an unfair onus on drivers or people associated with trucking companies to deliver their load and operate under unreasonable circumstances or within unrealistic time frames should be discouraged and, in fact, penalised if they act in that way.

It is interesting that this measure and the regulations do not include drivers. As I said, in the past there have been regulations in relation to mass, dimensions, load restraint and driver fatigue, but the model speeding heavy vehicle legislation does not include the drivers of heavy vehicles as there is already an existing framework and roadside enforcement that targets them.

There is a 'reasonable steps' defence if you are one of those in the chain of responsibility. The core obligation of anyone involved in that chain is to ensure that they do all they can to make sure that the aim is the outcome. If an accident or incident occurs, I think there is a reasonable expectation that all reasonable steps have been taken to ensure that the legislation has been complied with in the best possible way.

Another measure that is being introduced to make certain that South Australia is consistent with other states and territories is the Intelligent Access Program, which is not just about getting people behind the wheel who can read, write and understand road signs; it is about monitoring trucks and heavy vehicles, using a combination of a global navigation satellite system and mobile phone technology. This technology is already being used by trucking companies to monitor everything from the operational performance of engine transmission, fuel consumption, actual transmission temperature to systems voltages, and it is now being extended to enable vehicles to be monitored.

The upside is that this measure should improve the productivity and access for heavy vehicles on many of our roadways. Certainly, there are benefits not only for the truck operators, the drivers and the people who employ them but also for the taxpayers because it should result in a reduction of road wear and tear. As I said, many vehicles, including road transport vehicles, already use telematics for commercial purposes. When used in a commercial environment vehicle telematics can be a powerful and valuable tool to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, security and safety of vehicles, drivers and transport companies.

That comes from the fact sheet on telematics from the Transport Certification Australia website. I would recommend people go to this website and have a look at what is going on with the Intelligent Access Program and how telematics are being used. We are going to see more and more of this coming into place.

The South Australian legislation, once again, will be based on a model of the Australian Transport Council (ATC) legislation. We contacted the South Australian Road Transport Association to get some feedback on this, and we did not receive any, which was perhaps an indication that it has no issues with it.

We did receive some feedback from the South Australian Freight Council. The council is concerned that the introduction of the Intelligent Access Program (IAP) will lead to the system being used to cover emissions control and other issues not directly related to driver monitoring. It is concerned at the cost of equipment needed for IAP, especially in the current difficult economic climate, but it accepts that IAP must come in.

Other parts of the bill that we are looking at today involve regulation for the introduction of new speed detection devices. Section 53A allows the Governor to make regulations to approve apparatus such as speed analysers. I understand that the police are looking at new radar guns that have inbuilt cameras. This is to help them verify the particular vehicle that they are focusing on.

Anything that we can do to assist in the detection of speed and improve road safety I think should be supported. There are some issues with the accuracy of these speed analysers. We all know that. The police do try to comply with the requirements of both manufacturers and the various regulating agencies to ensure they are accurate, but I think there are still some outstanding issues with that.

The bill also removes the requirement to gazette the location of where both red light and traffic speed analysers are located. The government now has 86 speed and red light cameras, combined. The signs are clearly visible before those intersections. Whether you need to have signs in the first place is an arguable point. I think that you should be driving as safely as possible, not running red lights or speeding through intersections, which is a proven dangerous activity. So, to have those signs in front of those, I think, is a reminder that we should not need, but is there in the first place and a fair thing to do.

I am told that the former Liberal government actually put the signs in front of all speed cameras to warn people that the speed cameras were ahead, as a means of at least allowing you to check your speed and slow down. I was going down Military Road, West Beach, the other day and the West Torrens council had a big sign on Military Road that it is checking speed.

It was interesting to note that my speedo—which on the Commodore that I drive you can have a visual read-out—was reading 50 on the knocker and the big speedo sign said 48. So, I am pleased that my speedo is over-reading, not under-reading. I look forward to seeing South Australians not needing to have warning signs but complying with all speed regulations and legislation.

Whether you still need to gazette them, I do not think it takes much effort to do that. I do not think it is an onerous activity. So, it is something that I think could be continued, but if there is a real reason not to gazette them any more then perhaps that could be done. There may be people who I am unaware of who do rely on the gazetting of those positions to provide information, say, GPS users and others.

Section 173AA changes the testing period for the induction loops for these red light and speed cameras from six days to 27 days. Manufacturers of these induction loops say that they should be tested between 30 and 90 days, so it makes you wonder why we are testing every six days, particularly when the Victorians test every 30 days. Why have we gone to 27 days and not 30 days, or further out, if it is as reliable as we are led to believe? Surveys have been done and the movement within these loops is apparently quite miniscule, 2.5 millimetres, or something, over. I seek leave to continue my remarks.

Leave granted; debate adjourned.

[Sitting suspended from 13:00 to 14:00]