ROAD TRAFFIC (EMERGENCY VEHICLES) AMENDMENT BILL

Committee Stage

In committee.

(Continued from 20 September 2012.)

Clause 1.

Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN: Picking up where we left off a few months ago, when we were in committee but ran out of time, today I formally move:

Page 2, line 3—Delete 'Vehicles' and substitute 'Service Speed Zones'

Amendment carried; clause as amended passed.

Clause 2.

Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN: I move:

Page 2, lines 6 and 7—Delete:

'1 month after the day on which it is assented to by the Governor' and substitute:

on a day to be fixed by proclamation

Amendment carried; clause as amended passed.

Clause 3 passed.

Clause 4.

Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN: I move:

Page 2, lines 12 to 15—Delete clause 4 and substitute:

4—Substitution of section 83

Section 83—delete the section and substitute:

83—Speed in emergency service speed zone

(1) A person must not, while driving through an emergency service speed zone, drive at a speed greater than—

(a) 25 kilometres per hour; or

(b) if a lesser speed is required in the circumstances to avoid endangering any person—that lesser speed.

Note—

The penalty for a contravention against this section is set out in section 164A.

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply if the person is driving on a road that is divided by a median strip and the emergency service speed zone is on the other side of the road beyond the median strip.

(3) In this section—

emergency servicespeed zone means an area of road—

(a) in the immediate vicinity of an emergency vehicle that has stopped on the road and is displaying a flashing blue or red light (whether or not it is also displaying other lights); or

(b) between 2 sets of flashing blue or red lights that have been placed by an emergency worker at either end of a length of road on which an emergency vehicle has stopped;

emergency vehicle means a vehicle used by an emergency worker;

emergency worker means a police officer or a person who is an emergency worker as defined by the regulations for the purposes of this section;

5—Amendment of section 175—Evidence

Section 175(1)—after paragraph (a) insert:

(ab) a specified length of road was, during a specified period, an emergency service speed zone within the meaning of section 83; or

6—Review of operation of Act

(1) The Minister must cause a review of the operation of the provisions of the Road Traffic Act 1961 enacted or amended by this Act to be conducted, and a report on the results of the review to be submitted to him or her.

(2) The review must be completed, and the report submitted to the Minister, before the third anniversary of the commencement of this section.

(3) The Minister must, within 12 sitting days after receiving the report under this section, cause copies of the report to be laid before both Houses of Parliament.

Amendment carried; clause as amended passed.

Title passed.

Bill reported with amendment.

Third Reading

Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN (Stuart) (11:15): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

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) (11:15): The state government supports the amended bill tabled by the member for Stuart. During the 2010 election, the Australian Labor Party announced a similar proposal to ensure the speed limit was dropped from 40 to 25 km/h when passing emergency service vehicles attending a call. Soon after the election, concerns were raised by SAPOL and, whilst working through them, the member for Stuart introduced his private member's bill.

Upon explaining to him both the commitment of the government to see this through and the concerns that were being raised, his bipartisan approach to this has been appreciated. The Thinker in Residence report by Professor Wegman, released in the middle of the year, called for a bipartisan approach to road safety. The spirit of both parties to work through these issues to get things done in the interest of road safety pre-dates the report and demonstrates a willingness to deliver a good result for our emergency services and the community generally.

However, as I said, SAPOL had reservations regarding enforcement of this legislation. At the same time, we encountered overwhelming support from other key stakeholders, such as the SES, the United Firefighters Union, the Ambulance Association, the SES Volunteers Association and the CFS volunteers and their association.

Faced with this impasse, it was agreed that it was important to give all agencies the opportunity to have input to ensure that we were getting it right, making the right decisions. Government and opposition agreed to establish a select committee to examine the arguments for and against the bill. Thankfully, roadside injuries to emergency service workers have been minimal.

We also uphold the advice, however, from the Adelaide Centre for Automotive Safety Research, that the estimated risk of a pedestrian being fatally injured by a passing vehicle is 0.95 per cent at 25 km/h compared with 3.56 per cent when travelling at 40 km/h. The government agrees with the select committee that this data provides a convincing argument for a preventative approach to roadside safety for emergency service workers.

However, the government had concerns with the proposed penalties in the revised bill. I appreciate the member for Stuart's willingness to accept the government's suggestions that penalties should align with those applied to general speeding. I thank the members for Light, Taylor, Kavel and Stuart, as well as the chair, the member for Reynell, for their outstanding work on the committee. The state government is pleased to support this legislation.

Mr VAN HOLST PELLEKAAN (Stuart) (11:18): This private member's bill is all about making emergency service workers as safe as possible on roads. It is important to point out that that covers both professional and volunteer emergency services workers because their lives are equally as important as each other; whether they are paid staff or volunteers, the principle is exactly the same.

The minister referred to some concerns that the police had and I respect those issues. I have a view that the difficulties they encounter in regard to enforcement are probably very similar, whether the required speed limit is 40 or 25 km/h. I think making it 25 km/h, first, makes the roadside emergency services workers much safer and, secondly, allows a public education campaign to be far more effective because the public can then be educated about one speed limit. The 25 km/h speed limit would apply to red and blue flashing lights at emergency service scenes, to school bus flashing lights, and very often applies to roadside workers undertaking improvements or maintenance as well. I think that there is very good logic for this 25 km/h speed limit and that it should not make life too difficult for the police at all.

I thank the minister for her support for this bill. She has been very direct and straightforward with me all the way through, which I genuinely appreciate, as have her staff, which is fantastic. I also thank the government for allowing this to go to a committee for suggestion and for taking this issue seriously right from the very start. In that process, all the committee members—the members for Reynell, Taylor, Light and Kavel—applied themselves to this work very well, as did the staff who supported us in this business.

Thank you also to the people who gave evidence. We all know that some people and some organisations regularly come and provide evidence to a parliamentary committee, but for others it can be pretty nerve racking and pretty difficult. So, to everybody who came and provided their information to us, thank you very much.

I would also like to highlight the fact that this is something for which emergency service volunteer associations have been calling for a very long time. I think it is probably in excess of six years that this has been going on, so I thank them for their work and their advocacy and I congratulate them on the fact that we as a united parliament have got to this stage. I particularly highlight the work of Ms Wendy Shirley, who has applied herself to this—not only, but really she has led the charge on behalf of emergency service volunteers in general. She has done an outstanding job as the CEO of the CFS Volunteers Association. With us here today is Ms Sonia St Alban, who replaces her and who I am sure will do an excellent job. It is also lovely to have Mr Roger Flavell, president of that organisation, here to see this go through the house today.

We realise, of course, that this bill has to go through the upper house as well. I am assuming that, with united government and opposition support, that should go through very smoothly and quickly. I also note that the implementation of the impact of the changes to this act will come into effect on a day to be fixed by proclamation. We trust that the government will do that as quickly as possible—that it will get through the upper house very quickly and then will be put into place very quickly. The words that we have just heard from the minister mean that there should be no delay.

This was a Labor government election commitment running up to the last election. We have all agreed that it is a positive move and on the way in which it should be implemented, so I am sure the government will actually put it into place as quickly as possible. Thanks to all the people who have been involved in getting us to this stage, from many years ago all the way through to today, and thank you to the house for your support.

The SPEAKER: Of course, I taught Ms Wendy Shirley all she knows, although I am sure that she would say the reverse.

Bill read a third time and passed.