Legislative Council Fifty-Second Parliament, First Session (52-1) 52 1 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Bills Rail Safety (Safety Coordination) Amendment Bill RAIL SAFETY (SAFETY COORDINATION) AMENDMENT BILL Introduction and First Reading Introduction and First Reading Received from the House of Assembly and read a first time. Second Reading Second Reading The Hon. B.V. FINNIGAN Legislative Council Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for State/Local Government Relations, Minister for Gambling The Hon. B.V. FINNIGAN (Minister for Industrial Relations, Minister for State/Local Government Relations, Minister for Gambling) (17:25): I move: That this bill be now read a second time. I seek leave to have the second reading explanation inserted in Hansard without my reading it. Leave granted. The Rail Safety Act 2007 is based on national model legislation developed by the National Transport Commission and approved by the Australian Transport Council (ATC) on 2 June 2006. Among other things, the model legislation made provision for rail transport operators to make agreements with other rail transport operators where their rail operations interface. There was no provision for interface agreements between rail infrastructure managers and road authorities, but in approving the model legislation, ATC also approved the development of provisions to address this deficit. This decision was given effect in the Model Rail Safety (Amendment No. 2) Bill, approved by ATC in December 2007, and the present Bill seeks to introduce these provisions into the Rail Safety Act. There are approximately 100 crashes between a road vehicle and a train in Australia each year. South Australia has averaged 10 crashes per year over the last 10 years. Level crossings are the single biggest source of death and injury associated with railway operations. For example, in June 2007 at Kerang in Victoria's north-west, a collision between a truck and train at a level crossing caused 11 fatalities and dozens of injuries. A collision occurred in this State in December of the same year at Moloney Road, Virginia, when a truck struck the side of the Indian Pacific train. In that case, the truck struck a car carrier wagon that was between the locomotive and trailing passenger coaches. Although only the truck driver suffered serious injury in that incident, the potential for a Kerang type consequence was present. The effective joint management of level crossings by rail infrastructure managers and road authorities is a key issue for governments, industry and the community. Fatalities at railway level crossings are a significant issue for rail transport operators; however, they are a very small part of the road network, and road authorities have a different focus of operations. Historically, in South Australia, the management of level crossings lay primarily with government owned railway authorities. Over time, arrangements with road authorities for shared management and maintenance responsibilities evolved but were never established in legislation. The privatisation of railways in the 1990s has seen many of these informal agreements challenged or implemented in differing ways. These amendments provide the mechanism to formalise the joint management arrangements between rail infrastructure managers and road authorities where such arrangements exist and will serve to cause arrangements to be made where they do not exist. The Bill expands on the current provisions of the Rail Safety Act applicable to rail operators, and will require road authorities responsible for public roads to: identify and assess safety risks associated with the existence of any road and rail crossing; and determine measures to manage those risks; and seek to enter into an interface agreement with the relevant rail infrastructure manager. This will require parties to establish processes for agreeing on appropriate risk controls, responsibilities and other safety risk management strategies at road/rail interfaces, including general maintenance, upgrades or risk assessments, prior to safety issues emerging that require immediate attention The legislation enables the parties to jointly identify and assess risks, or for one party to adopt the identification and assessment carried out by the other party. The same obligations will apply to managers of private roads but only if the relevant rail infrastructure manager advises that it is necessary. The Bill makes provision for a person to be appointed by the Minister to intervene in situations where road or rail infrastructure managers are failing or refusing to enter into interface agreements. This Appointed Person will have the power to direct the parties as to the content of an interface plan, which the parties must then implement. The Appointed Person will be a person appointed by the Minister for the purpose. Most likely this person will usually be the Rail Safety Regulator, although another person may be appointed should the circumstances require. Consistent with the ATC approved (December 2006) National Policy Statement for Transitional Arrangements for the Implementation of National Model Rail Safety Legislation, interface agreements between road authorities and railway infrastructure managers will need to be in place within three years after this Bill is passed. South Australia is well placed to achieve this timeframe. Significant work has already been undertaken by the Department for Transport, Energy and Infrastructure to identify and assess public road level crossings. Support and guidance to the affected parties on the requirements of the Bill and how to implement them will be provided by the Department and the State Level Crossing Strategy Advisory Committee (comprised of representatives from industry and State and local government). It is proposed that the amendments will be brought into operation as soon as possible after the Bill's passage through Parliament. The Minister for Transport intends to give a general direction to the Rail Safety Regulator, pursuant to section 20 of the Rail Safety Act 2007, that the Regulator is to adopt an educative approach to the enforcement of the requirements during the period that road authorities and rail infrastructure managers are developing interface agreements. Such a direction will not interfere with the Regulator's ability to act in relation to immediate or systemic safety issues as the Regulator sees fit. The National Transport Commission undertook national public consultation during the development of the model amendments in 2007. In addition, the Department has consulted with industry and local government on this Bill. Public information sessions were held in Adelaide and Port Lincoln in June 2010 and assistance will be provided through the State Level Crossing Strategy Advisory Committee in relation to the development of template agreements during the implementation period. This Bill will strengthen level safety crossing safety management by providing a mechanism to bring road authorities and rail infrastructure managers together to assess risks where rail and roads intersect and to develop plans to address those risks. I commend the Bill to the House. Explanation of Clauses Explanation of Clauses Part 1—Preliminary 1—Short title 2—Commencement 3—Amendment provisions These clauses are formal. Part 2—Amendment of Rail Safety Act 2007 4—Amendment of section 4—Interpretation Various definitions are to be inserted into the Act for the purposes of the new sections proposed to be inserted by this measure. 5—Amendment of section 57—Exemption from accreditation This clause amends section 57(2)(b) to clarify that conditions imposed by the Regulator for the purposes of the section may be the same as, or similar to, any provisions of Division 4, 5 or 6 of the Act. 6—Amendment of section 58—Safety management system This clause proposes amendments to section 58 consequential on the substitution of section 62 proposed by clause 7. 7—Substitution of section 62 This clause proposes to repeal section 62 and substitute the following sections that make provision for the identification and management of risks in relation to railway operations, railway infrastructure and roads. 62—Interface coordination—rail transport operators This section requires a rail transport operator to identify and assess risks to safety that arise in relation to railway operations carried out by or on behalf of the rail transport operator as a result of railway operations carried out by or on behalf of another rail transport operator. The rail transport operator must determine measures to manage the risks and also seek to enter into an interface agreement with the other rail transport operator. An interface agreement is defined as an agreement about managing risks to safety (including those matters listed in the definition). It is an offence to fail to comply with the section and a maximum penalty of $300,000 for a body corporate and $100,000 for a natural person is prescribed. 62A—Interface coordination—rail infrastructure and roads other than private roads This section requires both a railway infrastructure manager and a road manager (other than a manager of a private road) to identify and assess, so far as is reasonably practicable, risks to safety that may arise from the use of the existence or use of any rail or road crossing that is part of the road infrastructure of the road manager. The railway infrastructure manager and the road manager must both determine measures to manage the risks and also seek to enter into an interface agreement with the other. It is an offence for a railway infrastructure manager to fail to comply with the section and a maximum penalty of $300,000 for a body corporate and $100,000 for a natural person is prescribed. Nothing in this section authorises or requires a road manager to act inconsistently with, or without regard to, the functions, obligations or powers conferred on it by or under an Act other than the principal Act. 62B—Interface coordination—rail infrastructure and private roads This section requires a railway infrastructure manager to identify and assess, so far as is reasonably practicable, risks to safety that may arise from railway operations carried out on, or in relation to, the manager's rail infrastructure because of (or partly because of) the existence or use of any rail or road crossing that is part of the road infrastructure of a private road. The railway infrastructure manager must consider whether the management of those risks needs to be carried out in conjunction with the road manager of the private road. If the railway infrastructure manager is of the opinion that the risks do need to be so managed, the railway infrastructure manager must give written notice to the road manager, determine measures to manage those risks, and seek to enter into an interface agreement with the road manager. If the railway infrastructure manager is of the opinion that the risks need not be managed in conjunction with the private road manager, the railway infrastructure manager must keep a written record of that opinion. If a railway infrastructure manager gives a written notice to a private road manager under this section, the road manager must identify and assess, so far as is reasonably practicable, risks to safety that may arise from the existence or use of any rail or road crossing that is part of the road infrastructure of the road because of (or partly because of) railway operations. The road manager must then determine measures to manage the risks and also seek to enter into an interface agreement with the railway infrastructure manager. It is an offence for a railway infrastructure manager or a road manager to fail to comply with the section and a maximum penalty of $300,000 for a body corporate and $100,000 for a natural person is prescribed in each case. 62C—Identification and assessment of risks This section provides that a rail transport operator, rail infrastructure manager or road manager may assess risks to safety that arise in relation to another person's operations individually, together with the other person, or by adopting the other person's assessment. 62D—Scope of interface agreements This section outlines the scope of an interface agreement entered into under Part 4 Division 4. 62E—Appointed person may give directions This section provides for a person appointed by the Minister to require compliance with section 62, 62A or 62B where a rail transport operator, rail infrastructure manager or road manager is unreasonably refusing or failing to enter into an interface agreement with another person as required, or is unreasonably delaying the negotiation of such an agreement. The appointed person may issue warnings, advise on suggested terms for inclusion in an interface agreement, require the production of information, and give directions in relation to safety arrangements that are to apply under section 62, 62A or 62B. The section creates an offence of failing to comply with a notice or direction given by an appointed person under the section and a maximum penalty of $120,000 for a body corporate and $40,000 for a natural person is prescribed. 62F—Register of interface agreements This section requires rail transport operators and road managers to maintain a register of all interface agreements to which they are a party and any arrangements determined by the appointed person under proposed clause 62E. A penalty of $10,000 applies for a failure to comply is prescribed. 8—Amendment of section 112—Temporary closing of railway crossings, bridges etc This clause amends section 112 of the Act to include a subway in the list of areas that may be closed or regulated because of an immediate threat to safety. Debate adjourned on motion of Hon. J.M.A. Lensink. At 17:25 the council adjourned until Wednesday 23 March 2011 at 14:15.