Legislative Council Fifty-Third Parliament, Second Session (53-2) 53 2 Parliament of South Australia Legislative Council published Question Time Drug and Alcohol Testing Drug and Alcohol Testing The Hon. T.J. STEPHENS Legislative Council Drug and Alcohol Testing The Hon. T.J. STEPHENS (15:03): I seek leave to make a brief explanation before asking the Minister for Police questions regarding drug testing for drivers. Leave granted. The Hon. T.J. STEPHENS Legislative Council The Hon. T.J. STEPHENS: In 2015-16, there were 2,174 fewer drug tests conducted by SAPOL on drivers, yet over the last five years there has been an increasing trend of positive tests, indicating an escalating drug driving problem. The RAA has publicly stated that there needs to be greater testing. The Sunday Mail recently reported that minister Malinauskas refused to say why police have reduced drug driving tests. My questions are: 1.	Can the minister confirm that the reduction in drug driving tests is due to budgetary constraints? 2.	Given that the minister attempted to justify his decision to close metropolitan police stations by having more officers in the community, how can the minister explain the reduction in drug driving tests, and what is the subsequent impact on road safety in South Australia? 3.	I have asked the minister a number of times to describe to this chamber the police process regarding drug testing and we still haven't had an answer. When can we expect one? The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS Legislative Council Minister for Police, Minister for Correctional Services, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Road Safety The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS (Minister for Police, Minister for Correctional Services, Minister for Emergency Services, Minister for Road Safety) (15:04): Normally, I start this process by thanking honourable members for their question. That is somewhat harder to do in this particular instance because I think the Hon. Mr Stephens is better than the question he just asked. He knows all too well that operational decisions regarding police are a matter for the police commissioner. The honourable member— The Hon. J.S.L. Dawkins interjecting: The President Legislative Council The PRESIDENT: Order! The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS Legislative Council The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: The honourable member suggested in his question that I made a decision to close police stations. I did not make— The Hon. T.J. Stephens Legislative Council The Hon. T.J. Stephens: I didn't. The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS Legislative Council The Hon. P. MALINAUSKAS: Yes, that's what you said. Check the Hansard. I did not make a decision to close any police stations or reduce any police station hours. That was a decision that was made by the police commissioner, as the Hon. Mr Stephens well knows. The reason why the police commissioner decided to make that decision—as I am sure is the reason why he makes a whole range of different operational decisions—was to work out how he can use his resources (which are increasing to a now record level that we have never seen as high before in the state's history) in such a way as to best deliver public safety outcomes. With respect to drug driving, it is not because he has had budget cuts. SAPOL hasn't had budget cuts. SAPOL's budget continues to grow in real terms, as it consistently has throughout the course of this government's history. What he may have done is make decisions around what is the best way to effect an outcome with respect to reducing drug driving. Enforcement is clearly a fundamental tool that is required if we are going to get drug driving stats down in our community, because it is a significant problem, as I have regularly acknowledged in this place. What SAPOL is doing is using an intelligence-based policing model to look at the way they capture people who are drug driving. They are using fewer tests and capturing more people, because the way they go about it is less random and more intelligence based or specified on trying to hone in on a particular cohort of drivers who are likely to be at risk of being drug drivers, which I think makes a lot of sense. As I was saying, the police are using a mechanism to ensure that they are using an intelligence-based policing model, which means they are getting more of an outcome with fewer actual tests. The number of tests itself is not indicative of SAPOL's commitment to the issue or the government's commitment to the issue; quite the opposite. We support SAPOL going about the business of using an intelligence-based policing model to ensure that we are capturing as many of the people who are doing the wrong thing as we reasonably can. That is the advice that I have received from SAPOL. I am not going to be the police minister who departs from decades of convention that has been time honoured by both sides of politics in this place by starting to intervene in what are legitimate operational police matters. Unless honourable members opposite, including the Hon. Mr Dawkins—who, I think, is probably only second to the Hon. Mr Brokenshire in his appetite to be police commissioner—believe that we should be intervening in the police commissioner's legitimate authority to go about policing and making operational decisions accordingly, then I think we should heed the advice of SAPOL and support the fact that they are getting a better public policy outcome in terms of capturing more people and using fewer tests to do it.