ROAD TRAFFIC (AVERAGE SPEED) AMENDMENT BILL

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading (resumed on motion).

The Hon. J.M. RANKINE (Wright—Minister for Police, Minister for Correctional Services, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Road Safety, Minister for Multicultural Affairs) (18:01): I thank members for their contribution, and thank the shadow minister for road safety. I make just a couple of points. This government is very committed to road safety and has introduced this bill to enable the use of average cameras to detect speeding on stretches of road where speeding has been identified as a road safety problem. Average speed detection is used extensively interstate and overseas, and it has been reported that the average speed cameras are perceived by the public as a fairer way of detecting speed because the cameras detect speed over a length of road instead of at a single point.

It is important to note that speeding remains a major cause of death and serious injury on our roads, and this bill introduces a new approach to detecting that. We have heard comments that most people are not lawbreakers, that we need to challenge those who are doing the worst on our roads, but the fact is that the people involved in crashes on our roads are generally not just those who are hoons but average people out there. The impact of speeding, the impact of exceeding a speed limit on a particular road, can have catastrophic impacts.

People have an obligation to obey the law. We heard from the member for Hammond, talking about the 100 km/h default speed limit; can I say—

Mr Pederick: I am talking about the signage; they're signposted roads as well.

The Hon. J.M. RANKINE: Reverting to the 100 kilometre default speed limit. Now, a couple of things: whilst you complain about these things, our road toll last year was, I think, the second lowest in history, down to 103 deaths. That is still absolutely unacceptable, and we need to do more. We had the lowest casualty crash rate last year, and currently this year—and touch wood—we are tracking at nine fewer deaths on our roads.

In relation to 100 kilometres specifically, there were 1,100 kilometres of rural arterial roads that reduced to 100 km/h in 2003. Research by the Centre for Automotive Safety Research showed that this reduced casualty crashes on the those roads by 20 per cent. That is enormous. We actually expect that the roads that we reduced to 100 last year are likely to save, on average, 12 casualty crashes per year.

Over the past five years we have spent more than $110 million on arterial roads. In addition, over the same period around $371 million has been spent on maintenance on rural roads in South Australia. That is a combination of both state and federal funding. There were only 67 overtaking lanes in South Australia when we came into government. Since then, we have built an additional 82 overtaking lanes, which represents an investment of over $100 million. All of the funds that are collected from speeding expiation notices go to the Community Road Safety Fund, so if you speed and you are caught, your money goes to the Community Road Safety Fund. It does not just go directly into Treasury coffers as people would like to have the public believe.

Dr McFetridge interjecting:

The Hon. J.M. RANKINE: It does not go to SAPOL and it does not go to Treasury, it goes to the Community Road Safety Fund. The member for Hammond asked about tolerances. I think he answered his own question when he said the police commissioner is not about to tell you about the tolerances.

Mr Pederick interjecting:

The Hon. J.M. RANKINE: I cannot get it out of him, so good luck; you try to get it out of him. This really is about providing fairness in relation to people driving and I think people have recognised that it is probably a much fairer system to have a time and distance calculation as opposed to a point in time. We were asked by the member for Stuart which fine would apply if someone received a point in time and an average speed fine. I am told that the police will decide which one applies and it is likely to be the higher speed, so that is my advice.

The member for Morphett asked me quietly about the set-up costs and the expected revenue that will come from these particular cameras that we are putting up. I do not have that information, so we will attempt to get that for him while we are between the houses. The issue around one or more drivers will be settled in exactly the same way as things are now, and the police will issue a fine to the owner. If the owner says, 'I wasn't driving, someone else was driving,' the expiation notice will go to that person. If they say, 'No, the three of us were driving' or whatever, they all have to provide the police commissioner with a statutory declaration to say who was driving and, if it is disputed, it goes to court and they need to convince the court. We understand that people will try to find ways and means out of this but, ultimately, the people working on this bill have done a lot of work to make sure that there is not a lot of wriggle room to get out of this.

In finishing, I thank the house for its support of this bill and I thank people from the department of transport for their hard work and diligence in preparing this legislation.

Bill read a second time.

Third Reading

The Hon. J.M. RANKINE (Wright—Minister for Police, Minister for Correctional Services, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Road Safety, Minister for Multicultural Affairs) (18:08): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.