Adjournment Debate

NATIONAL TRANSPORT REFORM

Mrs PENFOLD (Flinders) (16:51): Today I listened to the Minister for Transport speaking in his usual unpleasant and sarcastic way about perceived shortcomings of Liberal members and the advantages of Labor's national reform agenda that he has been putting in place in South Australia, most recently with the Road Traffic (Miscellaneous) Amendment Bill 2009.

National transport reform, as negotiated by the minister for our state, does not have many perceived benefits for our truck owners or drivers. This is now being discussed by them with the implementation of the South Australian Labor government's Road Transport (Heavy Vehicle Driver Fatigue) Bill template legislation from the federal government, which is proving unworkable in this state. It is no surprise that Western Australia has not adopted it. I therefore urge caution when embracing national reform.

The new fatigue laws are not only affecting truck drivers and owners but also anyone who buys items that have a freight component because the compliance costs have to be passed on or businesses will not survive in South Australia. Trucking companies have been put at a great disadvantage compared with other states as this legislation takes little account of the huge distances and difficulties encountered.

The legislation was obviously designed for the Eastern States and not for the states to the west and north of Adelaide. The driver fatigue laws are complicated and not practical for the long distances that truck drivers travel in most of South Australia. They are inconsistent between states, particularly disadvantaging South Australian drivers and transport operators who sit in the middle of the country and have to accommodate the changes in the law between states as well.

Work diaries have been set up for the short Eastern States runs and not for the long interstate hauls across the length and breadth of the nation that are the reality for South Australian truckies. Many drivers need a break of longer than a quarter of an hour during their trip. Often this can be up to three or four hours followed by another three or four hours at around the 14 hour driving and rest time. Drivers used to listen to their own body clocks but they are now being treated like robots.

However, if drivers take longer rest breaks to ensure the safety of themselves, their rigs and other road users, they are penalised because they have not taken a continuous seven hour long break in a 24 hour span. Not having this long break constitutes a severe breach of the law and attracts a $520 fine. Part 2, division 2.2.5 of the Occupational Health Safety and Welfare Regulations is very clear in the interpretation of conditions in the workplace regarding work breaks and also toilet facilities. Neither these rules nor the fatigue laws currently being enforced cover the long-distance highways.

Where else in Australia would an industry worker be penalised and fined for not taking his break at a specific time even if it means stopping at a rest bay with absolutely no facilities in the rain and behind a bush after walking through a wall of faeces to get to an unused spot? Where else would a worker be penalised if he did not stop at the side of the road or in an outdated 18^th century rest area because his work diary said he should not continue his journey to arrive at an area with proper facilities?

As one Eyre Peninsula driver graphically put it, maybe some understanding of the conditions would be realised if there was scrub near Parliament House and no other facilities to use for a toilet. Drivers are forced to stop in extreme temperatures in summer and winter without facilities to stay warm or cool if their truck does not have ancillary air conditioners to turn on while stationary. While crossing the Nullarbor, there is not even a tree to pull up under during the heat of the day.

The effect of the new laws will be to make drivers more fatigued, not less, on these interstate hauls. I have also been advised of enforced infringements of animal welfare laws where drivers who have been held up with police and departmental checks and other unforeseen circumstances have not been able to deliver their live animal loads to their destinations because they are running a little late and have to take an enforced break. Common sense must prevail.

Adding a second driver to a rig adds considerably to the cost of goods transported, a cost which the customer ultimately pays. That is always supposing that licensed drivers are available. It is one of the vocations where there are job vacancies. The second driver is expected to sleep in the truck's sleeping compartment while the truck is moving which is not conducive to sleep, particularly on the older sealed and unsealed roads found in many places.

A driver operating a rig on his own would end up being bankrupted if he altered his sleep times to his body clock because of the $520 fines for a severe breach due to sleeping when tired. Many drivers are being fined large amounts for small infringements.

These laws and regulations simply become another revenue raiser at the expense of South Australians. Work diary infringements are stacked against the single driver and can bankrupt him. A South Australian driver who travels in and out of Perth on his normal trip can only drive 14 hours in 24 on basic fatigue management (BFM).

He can leave Perth after a two day rest in a motel while waiting for freight and drive to his BFM accreditation of 14 hours, while his Western Australian counterpart can leave at the same time and drive for 17 hours under Western Australian fatigue management requirements. However, if the South Australian driver has stayed in Perth for more than seven days, he can also travel on the Western Australian fatigue management system for 17 hours provided that he is accredited.

The only thing that has changed in these circumstances is the bureaucracy under which the drivers are compelled to work. While basic fatigue management talks about a person's body clock, it does not allow drivers to use their body clock or their brains. It seems that the law is stacked against the single driver and owner/driver as the fines are huge and the law is inconsistent from state to state, especially concerning the two-thirds of South Australia west of Port Augusta because of the distances to Western Australia rather than the Eastern States.

The industry now has a 36 hour rule which recognises areas of driving most susceptible to accidents. There are now long/night hours and short hours. Western Australian fatigue management does not have an inclusion for long and short hours but does make mention of fatigue areas in night driving—yet another obstacle for South Australian drivers. Many drivers are struggling to come to grips with the new rules and the interpretation of the 36 hour rule.

Long hours are between midnight and 6am, or about 12 hours' driving time. A long hour supposedly is recognition of fatigue and equates to driving during the most dangerous times of fatigue. Thus, a driver starting at midnight and driving until 6am has already driven six long/night hours, according to legislation.

A driver is only allowed 36 long/night hours in a week, with the long hours aggregated at the end of each week. Accepting that a driver can work or drive for 14 hours under BFM, what happens if he starts his shift at midnight? He is therefore using the fatigue long/night hours at the start of his journey which does seem contradictory to the reason for the long/night hour rule.

If the driver did the same route and left at 6am, he would avoid the six long hours from midnight to 6am and would only accrue one long hour at the end of the trip for over 12 hours of driving. Is a long hour only a long hour at the end of the week after it is accrued? Does it mean that if a driver starts his shift at midnight, he is more prone to have an accident but it is accepted as, even though he has driven legally 14 hours in his shift, he has technically used six long hours (midnight to 6am) and one short hour, whereas if he started at 6am he would have only driven one long hour? I know of drivers who prefer to drive at night because it better suits their body clock, there is less traffic on the roads and, particularly in summer, the weather conditions are much more amenable, yet the 36-hour rule can penalise them.

Designated rest areas are another source of confusion and angst. It is one thing to put restrictions on the hours that drivers work allegedly promoting safety but, in reality, raising revenue while adversely affecting livelihoods and business. What happens when a driver's time by his work diary has expired but there is no rest area? He risks an infringement of $520 if he continues to drive until he comes to a rest area, and usually the same if he pulls off where he is but where there is no rest area. The legislation tells us to pull off onto the shoulder, provided it is done with care and in sight of other road users or with warning triangles out. It is not a good idea to pull off on the shoulder as in winter your rig could get hopelessly bogged or, worse still, roll over in the soft edges. Also, where are the facilities for the driver? There are absolutely none.

According to the website of the Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure, at the time when the Minister for Transport was boasting about putting some money into rest areas on the Adelaide to Port Augusta run, rest areas on all highways had not been constructed. There is no standard set for their dimensions nor facilities in place for the road transport industry, yet drivers are to be policed for infringements. Surely, this shows the absolutely farcical situation existing at the moment.

A notice placed in The Advertiser of 7 March 2009 by the department of transport informed the public that the Road Traffic (Heavy Vehicle Driver Fatigue) Transitional Class Exemption Notice 2008 would expire on 28 March. It went on to say that drivers must be accredited in basic fatigue management or advanced fatigue management or they would be required to revert to standard hours of 12 hours' work in a 24-hour period. A letter dated 31 January—

Time expired.