Motor Vehicles (Motor Driving Instructors and Authorised Examiners) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 13 November 2024.)

The Hon. C. BONAROS (15:39): I rise to speak in support of the Motor Vehicles (Motor Driving Instructors and Authorised Examiners) Amendment Bill 2024. The bill establishes a framework to address longstanding issues in the industry which, as we know, has been troubled by incidents of misconduct and extremely alarming incidents. From significant gaps in oversight to accountability issues, this industry has unfortunately seen its share of so-called black sheep.

The ICAC report tabled in 2022 made it clear that reform in this space is urgently needed and this bill aims to tighten those cracks, introducing a code of conduct alongside crucial reforms to the graduated licensing scheme. The majority of those impacted by these training and examination processes we need to remember are young drivers, a particularly vulnerable cohort in our community. Their safety and that of all road users absolutely deserves to be strengthened and that is what these measures are all aimed at.

Some aspects of the bill have sparked concern, especially among those advocating for learners with disabilities. I have received, as I am sure others have, a considerable amount of correspondence on this and I want to acknowledge these voices. I understand that through the regulations specific provisions will be made for individuals with needs and I am assured through my discussions with stakeholders and indeed the government that these will be addressed appropriately and will also, of course, be the subject of scrutiny by all of us.

The bill is the product of extensive work and collaboration, and I am pleased the government has listened. I have been having ongoing discussions now with the minister and his team and department for weeks and I am pleased that has resulted in the consultative working group, which the minister I am sure will speak to further, that is aimed at ensuring ongoing input from industry and community representatives as these reforms are implemented.

That includes, of course, experts industry wide, including the RAA and others. I have worked very closely with the RAA in this space to ensure that their concerns on behalf of industry are addressed. I am confident that this partnership, this collaboration that we have landed on, will actually achieve that end and will help refine the details, making these changes effective and lasting.

I think it is important to note the media release by the RAA that welcomes the commitment from the state government to encourage learners to undertake professional driving lessons through the new incentive scheme as part of the package of reforms to improve the driver training industry and the RAA's commitment to working collaboratively with the state government to ensure that the proposed reforms for the driver training industry benefit all learner drivers and road safety into the future.

They have been advocating for wholesale reforms to the driver training industry for several years now to stamp out corruption, improve the availability and affordability of lessons, and train safer drivers for our roads. They have indicated their support for, as I said, stamping out corruption in the driver training sector, improving safety for learner drivers with the mandatory installation of cameras and GPS devices in vehicles, bolstering compliance and introducing a code of practice, and providing a consistent method of final assessment with government-appointed authorised examiners, amongst other things.

I do note the earlier debate we had on the issue of cameras and GPS; this is not the first time we have canvassed this issue. But do not underestimate the vulnerability of the cohort of people who are most likely to be using this scheme. Do not underestimate their vulnerability. We have had instances that have effectively resulted in sexual harassment, particularly of young girls who are accessing driver training, and that is completely unacceptable.

When I was turning my mind to this I was thinking of the Ubers and the taxis and everything else we access and the fact that they all have these cameras in there, yet the one vehicle that we allow our children to go into as part of this scheme is not necessarily covered by the same thing. That is not to suggest that there is an industry full of rotten apples who are going to take part in this, but the same can be said for Uber and taxis as well and we still go to that very important length. I think it is absolutely necessary and critical that we do so when we are dealing with such a vulnerable cohort of young people in our community. The RAA, as I said, has said that it:

…supports these much-needed reforms which will build a better foundation for the driver training industry to give learner drivers the best possible opportunity to learn the correct skills, attitude and roadcraft.

The RAA said that ultimately their interest is in ensuring that learner drivers are safe drivers—I think that also extends to being safe while they are learning to drive—so that we have safer roads and safer communities and reduce the number of people killed or injured on our roads in the long term.

It is to that effect that not only have they supported the government's initiative but also, through the consultative forum which we have established under the commitments given by government, undertaken to continue to work with government on the regulations that will inform the implementation of this legislation, including developing a new practical driving test, the potential to retain other elements of the scheme and ensuring the cost of obtaining a licence remains affordable for everyone, which is one of the other issues that has been raised.

On that note I do acknowledge, again, the extensive advocacy of the RAA but also in terms of the development, like I said, of the reforms going forward. I thank, in particular, for all of their time and effort on that front Samuel, David and Charles.

Enhanced driver training will lead to more skilled drivers and ultimately safer roads. Of course, there are accessibility concerns, particularly around cost, that cannot be overlooked as part of this. For many families the high price of driver education is prohibitive. Where you have more than one child that is multiplied. A driving test alone can cost over $500, and that is unattainable for many families. I do intend to ask the minister to provide an explanation and further information during the committee stage regarding the programs that can support those unable to afford these services and, indeed, how the government anticipates that those costs will decrease under this scheme.

I note that others in this chamber had initially signalled their intention to refer this bill to a committee, but they have since changed their tune and now support its passage today. That is a good outcome. It is a good outcome all round, I think. It is, I think, a good indication of how constructive those discussions of those of us who have been partaking in those discussions behind the scenes with industry and with government and with the minister's department have been.

The extensive work already invested in these reforms and the government's commitment to ongoing consultation through a working group I think quite rightly make any further delays to the scheme unnecessary. Based on comments I have heard this week I think that view will be shared by others in this place, but we will wait and see.

With this shift in support I am pleased to see broader recognition of the urgency of the need. If we just look at ICAC, that was a 2022 issue. If we look at the other issues that have been raised, they pre-date that. So they are very urgent reforms in terms of improving driver training, industry standards and ultimately road safety, without additional hold-ups.

In closing, I would like to thank the minister's departmental team for all of their hard work on this issue and especially my mate Nick for his persistence and patience, particularly with me. With those words, I reiterate my full support for this bill.

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN (Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development, Minister for Forest Industries) (15:49): I thank those members of this place who have made contributions: the Hon. Ben Hood, the Hon. Frank Pangallo, the Hon. Reggie Martin, the Hon. Rob Simms and the Hon. Connie Bonaros. I point out that in the contribution by the Hon. Ben Hood he stated that the minister had suggested that all or the majority of the industry was corrupt or were sexual predators. Many of the other comments here have certainly shown that not to be the situation.

There is a small number, but a significant number nonetheless, of people within the industry who have not been doing the right thing. The volume of convictions and administrative sanctions imposed on industry members over the past eight years, along with the findings of the ICAC investigation, showed that there are significant issues.

I reflect that the Hon. Mr Pangallo referred to his positive discussions with the minister, and the Hon. Ms Bonaros has referred to her ongoing and constructive discussions. That is certainly what we are all looking for in this bill—an outcome that addresses significant issues that have come to the fore, while maintaining the outcomes we are looking for.

We have heard that some licences have been obtained but that not all mandatory driving tasks have been done. That is a clear example of a safety risk for all South Australian road users. We know there have been in some cases, particularly in regional areas, very high costs to obtain a licence. We are looking for certainty of costs for tests, which will provide all learner drivers and their families, who might be supporting them, with the opportunity to know exactly what they will be up for in terms of the testing regime. Improved safety, improved certainty and safety for individuals going through the process are all key aspects of the goals of this bill and I commend it to the chamber.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

In committee.

Clause 1.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: My first question to the minister is one that I referred to in my second reading contribution in relation to the issue of costs. The government has said that it is anticipating that costs, in terms of accessing driver training, will plummet or decrease under the scheme as a result of the changes. I am hoping the minister can explain how that is.

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that information is that currently the average cost of the testing is around $300. That will be reducing to $240. In regional areas, for example, applicants will not need to be paying for travel costs of the examiners. The certainty that will be forthcoming, in terms of the cost of the test, will be of significant assistance to those who are seeking to get their licences.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: How many authorised examiners are anticipated to function, in terms of FTEs, under the scheme?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that the number is likely to be between 40 and 50—most likely closer to 50. Obviously, it will be demand driven. Should the member be asking, that will include in regional areas in terms of the demand; that will dictate what the number of examiners is.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: How many learner drivers are there in any given year on average, and how does that compare to the number of examiners? Noting, of course, that not everybody is going to an examiner at the same time, so there are ebbs and flows and that will fluctuate throughout the course of a year, but was that used in coming to that number of 40 to 50 FTEs?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that we do know the numbers because every test at the moment has to be booked through the government and so the accurate numbers are available. There are approximately 50,000 tests per year and so that is what the number of required examiners has been based upon.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: Just as a matter of record, can the minister highlight any of the other sorts of schemes and subsidy schemes that exist that will continue to exist alongside of this in terms of making getting your driver's licence affordable, particularly amongst not just regional drivers but also the program that relates specifically to Indigenous young drivers?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that the On the Right Track program will continue. It is a program in the Far North which aims to assist people in the APY lands in terms of gaining their licence. There will now be a greater pool of examiners available for that. We are aware of other programs which are run by community organisations around the state, which will not be directly affected by this.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: I have a few questions of the minister regarding the composition of the consultative forum that has been referenced during the second reading discussion. Can the minister advise who will be on the consultative forum, how those stakeholders have been selected, and what opportunities there will be for members of the community to express their views through that forum? Will it have a similar structure to an inquiry? What will it look like?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that there are two parts in the answer to the question. The first is in terms of public consultation. There has been consultation over many years in the development of this bill, and so it is fair to say that a lot of that consultation has been taken on board. In terms of general public input, that has already occurred. For the consultative forum, it will include the Professional Driver Trainers Association, the Australian Driver Trainers Association, the RAA and groups that are involved with road safety, such as the Get Home Safe Foundation. We will also engage with those involved with the disability sector; for example, the Office for Autism—particularly looking at those who are neurodivergent—in addition to other disability representative groups.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: Who will convene the forum? Is it being convened by the minister, and what timeframe will it operate under?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that, whilst it has not been finalised, the expectation is that it is most likely to be convened by the Registrar of Motor Vehicles. The consultation, given that it will involve the drafting of the regulations as well as the codes of practice, is likely to take a number of months.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: This is my final question. I can see the Hon. Heidi Girolamo is keen to get on her feet, so this is the last one from me. When will we get a report on the outcome of that consultative forum? Will the minister undertake to share the findings of that forum with the parliament?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that the outcomes of the consultative forum will be the regulations and the codes of practice.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: Just one more associated question, sorry. This is my final question. I understand the minister has said that the feedback from the consultative process will inform the regulations, but will the minister also undertake to provide a summary of the outcome of that consultation to the parliament so that there is a level of transparency around the information that is being shared?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I think I cannot answer on behalf of the minister. I will certainly note that request and pass it on.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: In regard to the consultative committee, will we have assurance that there will be regional representation on the committee?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: The associations, I am advised, have interests across the entire state. If we think about the RAA, for example, they are very active in regional areas, not to mention some of those other organisations that I have already referred to.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: So there will not be a formalised, I guess, allocation of representatives from the regions on the committee?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: It is worth noting that the committee is not comprised of members of the public, as I mentioned. The public consultation has been undertaken over a number of years. The associations will put forward those who are most well equipped, in their view, to be able to represent the various views of the associations that I have referred to and provide the important input to that process.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: Just to be clear on the record, the associations that we are talking about are the Australian Driver Trainers Association, the Professional Driver Trainers Association and, of course, the RAA. In and of themselves a critical element of what they do is actually dedicated towards our regions and how these schemes operate in the regions, so they have people who deal specifically with this issue and have had input not only to date but will continue to have input into that forum going forward.

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I think that is an accurate representation, yes.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: Just to be clear, throughout the process that has taken place thus far, that has been a key element that has been canvassed by all of those groups—certainly through the discussions I have had—and it is one of their primary objectives in terms of the formulation of any regulations around this scheme.

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: Yes, that is my understanding.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: Would the minister consider holding a special session of the consultative forum in a regional area to give regional communities more of an opportunity to have input?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: Obviously, again, I cannot speak directly on behalf of the minister, but I would point out that this is the consultative committee, as I have already mentioned now I think several times in the last 10 or 15 minutes, and it is a committee of those associations. The public consultation has occurred over a number of years. It has been extensive, it has involved the opportunity for people across the state to be involved. I think it is also fair to say in all sincerity that there are many of us here who are very keen to ensure that these reforms make a positive difference for people in regional areas.

We have already heard about the additional costs that to date have been experienced by people in regional areas. As someone living regionally myself, I am obviously very aware of that. I think it is fair to say there are plenty of people in this place who are. The associations that we have referred to, and have been alluded to by the Hon. Ms Bonaros, are well used to considering the regional impacts of the current regime that we have and will be very involved in ensuring that there are no unintended consequences for regional areas going forward.

The Hon. R.A. SIMMS: I understand the minister has canvassed the role of the forum over the last 15 minutes or so. It is new to me. That is why I am asking questions about it, just to get my head around how it will work and what role it will play, because I had understood there was likely to be an inquiry that would look at some of these issues. In light of the fact that there is not likely to be a session in a regional community, would the Minister for Regional Development herself consider attending a session of the consultative forum so that she can communicate the views of regional communities and ensure that they are taken into consideration?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: Given that the purpose of the consultative committee will be to develop the regulations and the codes of practice, I think it is clear that there will be strong regional input into that process.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: Can I just say, and I am not—well I am defending the government here. I mean no disrespect to the minister but I would have thought—frankly, minister, I mean no disrespect—the associations that we have listed who have individuals who work specifically in this area would be more equipped to deal with those issues than the minister herself. Although I am sure the minister would like to take a keen interest in those outcomes, we are dealing with bodies which have extensive experience and expertise in this area and it forms part of the critical work that they do and has led to this point.

Just in terms of that role—and I am hoping the minister will agree with everything I am saying here, other than the fact that they may have more experience than her—the reason why this is so important is that there is obviously a regulatory framework that has to follow. The concern from industry would be that they have no input into that regulatory framework regardless of all the work that has already happened in the background. This actually ensures that they have a place at the table in terms of the development of that regulatory framework and their feedback into that going forward.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: In regard to the standardised fee of $240, I presume that would be included within the regulation. Are you able to expand on that for me further and how that amount has been determined? Also, the minister's media release announcing the reforms on 30 August 2024 refers to a survey that found the median price for the test is currently $319. Can the minister confirm the current situation and how that prescribed fee was calculated?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that the amount of $240 has been established through modelling the full cost recovery. I think it does speak to the fact of one of the things that this bill is trying to address, which is that there have been very inconsistent amounts being charged across the state and across the metropolitan area. It is important that we have some certainty. The advice is that the model will be looking at full cost recovery, and that amount equates to $240.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: In regard to the amount currently being charged that I also referred to, $319 on average, the South Australian Government Gazette outlined the prescribed fee for government-authorised examiners of $62 for a test less than 40 minutes and $142 for a test exceeding 40 minutes duration, in addition to a level 2 fee for administration and bookings. Can you explain whether there are concerns around current prescribed fees not being adhered to and whether that is currently being policed?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that the amounts that have been referred to by the honourable member relate to the prescribed fees for a government assessor and that there are no regulated fees in the private sector under the current framework. That indeed explains why there is such a discrepancy and great differences found between different learner drivers' experiences, and it is something that will be addressed through this proposed framework.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: In regard to that, have there been concerns raised over the current prescribed fees? Does the minister have further details on how the $319 median price was determined? You estimated the median price to currently be around $319. How has this been determined or calculated?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised the research was undertaken by contacting a number of driving schools and authorised examiners and asking for what their prices are, as well as searches on websites and so on.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: Just as a point of clarity again, some of the questions the member is asking—I am hoping the minister might be able to elaborate on this—go to the heart of the issues that have been looked at through ICAC, and the complaints and also the disciplinary actions that have been taken, so that when we are talking about a cost and whether that is reasonable or not we have to factor that against those business practices that people have been partaking in that have resulted in high costs to learner drivers—disproportionately high costs—or practices that are just unethical, and that is the mischief, in a sense, that we are also trying to overcome through this scheme.

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: Yes, it is certainly the case that issues such as inconsistent costs are one of the issues that are trying to be overcome through this scheme, in addition to other matters that have been well ventilated either through this process or through the ICAC investigation outcomes and the various consultation that has happened over many years. We have heard many stories of people having to pay what appear to be exorbitant amounts. I guess a simple difference, it is probably very obvious, is that with the government assessors they will not be looking for a profit margin.

Of course, any private business needs to build in a profit margin for their business to be profitable. It is stating the obvious, and it is not suggesting that businesses should not be able to have a profit margin, but this comes to the core of what will be different under the new scheme, and that will result in both consistency and costs which are simply cost recovery and not involving a profit.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: In regard to when you were looking at what the median price was, how many motor driver instructors were surveyed?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: We do not have that number available.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: I guess concerns have been raised with the opposition where many say that the motor driver instructors have indicated that they take issue with the $240, saying that they actually are charging less than that overall. What is the department's response in regard to those concerns?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: The member herself referred to this being the average, and that means that some are higher and some are lower. Some will be incurring costs for a statewide coverage which would therefore result in higher costs than those who are not offering that service, but this will give certainty and a figure that is based on cost recovery.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: In regard to regional motor driver instructors in particular, it has been indicated that their fees are much lower than the figure of $240. Did the survey find a significant difference between testing fees in metropolitan South Australia versus country or regional South Australia?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that it showed that there were huge variances between different regions. For example, in regions or a town that has no authorised examiner, either the learner driver would need to travel long distances to access an authorised examiner, obviously at their own cost or, in some cases, pay extra for the examiner to come to them, hence the huge variances. When we talk about an average that comes down to taking into account those higher amounts as well as lower.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: Upon implementation, if it is found that the $240 does not in fact recover the costs of the department, is it possible that the fee will increase, and what conditions may cause this fee to be increased?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: The current figure has been calculated based on the current situation. It will be a regulated fee and therefore it will be treated the same as many other regulated fees within the government.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: In the departmental briefing, the opposition was told that market failures already exist in certain regional markets. Can you confirm where these market failures currently are and what has caused them?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised we do not have available a list of particular areas. It is worth noting that that can change almost from week to week because, at times, market failure will be due to, for example, an authorised examiner going on leave or something like that. At other times, it will be simply because of distance—that is, market failure—because no profit can be made. That generally explains the reasons for market failures.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: What are the current wait times across the state and how do they differ in regional locations?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: The government does not have access to the wait times for private companies.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: By reducing authorised examiner numbers by more than 80 per cent, from 260 to just 40 or 50, how does the department expect that these reforms will fix those market failures that we were discussing previously?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I would like to point out that the figure of 40 to 50—and the expectation is that it will be closer to 50—is full-time equivalents. My advice is that the number of examiners in total in South Australia includes many who work part-time.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: In regard to the comments before around market failures, without data or information on waitlists, how has the department come up with these concerns and how have they been raised with the department?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: First of all, I am advised that a number of pieces of correspondence come into the department from people complaining that they are not able to access a test and asking for assistance on how to do that. Secondly, there were large amounts of feedback. A consultation process began in late 2018 by asking the community about their driver training or driver testing experiences and what could be improved.

A number of consultation methods were used, including a YourSAy survey where the government received approximately 1,500 survey responses from people in the community who had an experience with the driver training industry in the previous five years. Those are just some, but I think even anecdotally many of us would have heard experiences of people who have had this issue, particularly in regional areas for those who go to the regions.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: Given people are able to have lessons on weekends, will the government assessors be working on weekends as well?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: Yes, that will be part of the employment arrangements.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: In the member for King's second reading speech she said there will be permanently based authorised examiners in regions. This differs from what the opposition were told in the departmental briefing. Could you please confirm whether this is the department's intention and what location the department is considering to permanently locate examiners?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: The expectation is that in the larger regional centres there will be permanently based staff. Obviously, that depends on being able to attract those staff through normal employment arrangements. That has also been described as potentially a hybrid model, in that there may not be the opportunity to recruit the full complement all at one time, in which case that would be supplemented by examiners who would travel to the area. However, the expectation is and the intention is that there will be permanently based regional examiners. We also have data on exactly how many tests are done in each regional area, so we will be able to establish what the appropriate staffing model is for those.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: I might change tack for a little bit, if that is okay with the member. I was hoping the minister could confirm also that as part of this reform there will be a public register that will provide details of every industry member, including their names and geographical service areas, and the importance of that public register, particularly in relation to the new and higher standards that operators will have to meet. So you will be on the register, people will know where you are, but those who are on the register will also obviously be subject to a much higher level of industry standards.

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: The Hon. Ms Bonaros is correct: there will be a public register that will record the examiner's name, the region they service, the classifications they are able to test for and if they are involved in heavy vehicle assessment. Of course, the code of practice and the standards and expectations will be much higher than they have been so far, with the goal of increasing safety and transparency for all those going through this system.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: Just on from that then, I am hoping the minister might be able to elaborate a little on the bonus hours for learner drivers who train with qualified instructors.

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: Members would be aware that there is currently a requirement to have 75 hours of accompanied driving through your learners permit before you are able to go to get your full licence. For every hour, up to a maximum of five, that a person is driving with a qualified instructor, that will be considered the equivalent of three hours. The clear intent there is to encourage people who have their learners permit and are attempting to get their licence to engage with qualified instructors to ensure that there is a good strong level of instruction and, ultimately, safer road users.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: And that in turn then also, it is hoped, will improve, obviously, their chances at passing that final road test. So you have had the benefit of the bonus hours and you have had the benefit of a qualified instructor with the aim and objective of passing that test when you do sit it.

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: Yes, that is right.

The Hon. C. BONAROS: Which in turn addresses the issue of costs for the scheme as well.

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: Potentially, if one is well prepared for the test, they are less likely to then need to resit the test. So having high-quality instruction and encouraging learner drivers to have that qualified instructor and then hopefully have a better chance of passing the test when they attempt it will all go towards that better outcome.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: In regard to the fact that the department will potentially hire private motor driving instructors, has the department modelled or considered how many motor driving instructors will leave the industry as a result of the changes and the consequent reduction in the supply of motor driving instructors that will potentially increase costs to students?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: It is not clear why these changes will result in people leaving the industry, as the member has claimed. Learner drivers will be encouraged to have lessons—we just talked about the bonus hours, for example, as one of the things that would encourage learner drivers to engage with those—and there will still be a high demand, is the expectation.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: Just to clarify, my question is in regard to the fact that the government will be hiring 50 instructors. No doubt, currently, many of them I assume would be working in the industry as private instructors. Has the government modelled any of the potential impact of these changes on the industry as a whole?

The Hon. C. BONAROS: Perhaps in answering that question the minister might confirm that we are talking about examiners, not instructors.

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that a number will be involved with both training and assessment, and that training component will not be significantly reduced. I would also point out that, as we mentioned earlier in terms of the numbers, the numbers the honourable member referred to were not full-time numbers. They were I think a headcount, essentially, and the approximately 50 that will be engaged by government are FTEs, so, again, there may be more individuals involved in that if they should choose to work on a part-time basis.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: One of the major concerns raised by learner drivers is the scrapping or perhaps the merging of the competency-based training and assessment or the logbook method. What is the take-up rate currently of the logbook compared to the test?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that VORT, the Vehicle On Road Test, comprises about 84 per cent, and the competency-based training assessment comprises 16 per cent.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: Stakeholders have indicated to us that it was as high as 80 per cent previously. Can the minister outline why the decrease in the logbook has occurred over time?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: It is individual choice whether someone chooses to use the VORT method or the competency-based.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: I understand that the competency-based logbook is unique to South Australia and has been popular with those who live with anxiety, disabilities and things like that. How will this change potentially impact, given that the logbook will no longer be an option?

The Hon. C.M. Scriven interjecting:

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: What will be the impact potentially on people with anxiety who would struggle with a test?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: The department has already begun engagement with the Office for Autism. I am advised that they are supportive of these changes. We need to remember that the purpose of these changes is to make the environment of learning to drive safer for those seeking their driving licence, to remove some of the totally inappropriate behaviour that has been reported as having occurred.

The department, I am advised, is also consulting with the Department of Human Services to mitigate any unintended accessibility impacts. I appreciate that the member was not asked about physical accessibility issues, but in case that is where she was going to go, I will try to get ahead of that. The department has agreed to seek advice from the Disability Minister's Advisory Council on best practice testing environment and lived experience to inform potential mitigating measures and information, education and training materials. As I mentioned, the department will engage with the Office for Autism, as well as other key disability stakeholders.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: Some motor driver instructors have suggested utilising the two-year implementation phase to trial the proposed regime alongside the current one. Has the department considered this as an option, either during the transition phase or after it?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised there would be a number of issues with that proposal, one of which would be the competitive neutrality, because the government would then be in competition with private operators.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: The opposition was advised in the briefing that counselling has been offered to the motor driver instructors as a result of these reforms. We were told that only one or two had taken up the option as of about a month ago. Can the minister confirm how many have sought health and wellbeing support to date?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that we do not have an update on that number.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: Some motor vehicle driver instructors have told us they are holding off investing significant capital in their driver training business due to uncertainty around these reforms and timeframes. For the benefit of the motor driver instructors, can the minister confirm that the current regime will remain in place during the transition phase over the next two years?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised yes.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: Stakeholders are also concerned about the seemingly unlimited powers being handed to the Registrar of Motor Vehicles. Can the minister please outline the changes being proposed to increase the power of the registrar, and do those powers differ from the current situation?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: My advice is that there is nothing to indicate that there will be increased powers with the registrar, so perhaps the perception of the honourable member could be further explained if it is something she wants to pursue.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: If you could just outline how the powers differ from the current situation, and will the minister retain oversight of decisions of the registrar and of DIT?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that there is nothing in this bill which changes the relationship between the Registrar of Motor Vehicles and the minister.

Clause passed.

Clauses 2 to 11 passed.

Clause 12.

The Hon. F. PANGALLO: I move:

Amendment No 1 [Pangallo–1]—

Page 20, after line 39—Insert:

98AAZ—Review of Part

(1) The Minister must, as soon as possible after the relevant day, cause a review of this Part to be undertaken.

(2) A report on the outcome of the review must be tabled in each House of Parliament within 1 year after the relevant day.

(3) In this section—

relevant day means the day that is 2 years after the day on which section 12 of the Motor Vehicles (Motor Driving Instructors and Authorised Examiners) Amendment Act 2024 comes into operation.

This is essentially a review of the act. I note that there has also been filed an amendment to my amendment by the government, which I certainly will support.

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I move:

Amendment No 1 [PrimIndRegDev–1]—

Amendment of Amendment No 1 [Pangallo-1]—clause 12, page 20, after line 39 [inserted section 98AAZ(3), definition of relevant day]—

Delete 'day on which section 12 of the Motor Vehicles (Motor Driving Instructors and Authorised Examiners) Amendment Act 2024 comes into operation' and substitute:

relevant day (within the meaning of Schedule 1 clause 1 of the Motor Vehicles (Motor Driving Instructors and Authorised Examiners) Amendment Act 2024)

The government does not object to a review but proposes that it should come after two years of full operation of the new framework, which will be realised on the relevant day. In regard to the amendment proposed by the Hon. Frank Pangallo, the government proposes this because the full picture of the new framework will not be known until the relevant day, which is 12 months after the commencement day provided for in the legislation.

Between those two days, driving instructors and examiners who are currently authorised will have to reapply if they wish to continue operating. The new framework includes any new conditions, such as those imposed under proposed section 98AAN(2), and also the requirements to observe a code of conduct and be subject to audits.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: The opposition will be supporting the amendments and the amendment to the amendment. I also note I do have additional questions at clause 12, but I am happy for the amendment to be moved.

Amendment to amendment carried; amendment as amended carried.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: In regard to clause 12, page 7, line 22, around the application for grant or renewal of a motor driving instructor licence, we understand that Austroads has produced an Assessing Fitness to Drive guide, which are national driver medical standards that are used by health professionals to access a driver's ability to drive safely and are used to monitor and manage commercial vehicle drivers' fitness for duty.

My question is: why not adopt Austroads' Assessing Fitness to Drive, the national standards, rather than leaving it up to the discretion of the registrar to determine whether a person is medically fit to be a motor driving instructor?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that the intention is that the registrar would use that particular program.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: In regard to the granting or renewal of an instructor's licence, this grants almost unconditional powers to the registrar. Subclause (2)(d) provides:

The Registrar must not grant…an instructors licence unless the Registrar is satisfied that—

…the applicant holds any qualification determined by the registrar…

Could the minister please outline what the qualification standards for the instructor's licence are? Why not outline them in the bill?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that the intention is that, through the consultation process that has been outlined and to which we have referred earlier today, these matters would be determined so that they are made in consultation with the industry. The reason these things are often not put directly into the bill is that they can change over time as circumstances change.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: In regard to the 'fit and proper person' section, industry groups have strong concerns that motor driver instructors, who are ultimately teachers, are being dealt with as if they have been lumped with criminal organisations. Why are such strict and restrictive conditions imposed on motor driver instructors when no similar impositions are on other professions such as that of teachers?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that the bill would give the ability for the registrar to consider associations, for example, with organised crime, in determining whether or not the person is a fit and proper person to take on this role. It does not necessarily mean that such an association would automatically ban the person.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: In regard to instructor's licence conditions, what recourse will there be for motor driver instructors to appeal decisions of the registrar, and how does that compare to the current situation?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that in the existing act under section 98Z there are appeal provisions, and further appeals can be made to SACAT.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: In regard to standards for motor driver instructors, significant privacy issues were raised by all stakeholders regarding the recording of camera footage, with the bill not providing any detail that would alleviate concerns. The opposition is advised that costs to purchase, set up and provide access to camera recording systems could be $5,000, with ongoing maintenance. My question to the minister is: who will be responsible for bearing the costs of purchasing and installing cameras, GPS devices or other designated devices that may be required by the registrar to be provided?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that the consultation process that is being established will look at what is the most appropriate equipment to be used to ensure the safety of people who are under instruction. The cost will be a business cost to an individual business.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: If the motor driver instructor bears the cost of the devices they should be entitled to retain access. Will motor driver instructors retain access to the footage, which would also be desirable to improve driver training or to defend themselves if there were any disputes or alleged offences?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that the intention is that that footage would remain the property of the Crown, and that is similar to the current situation for taxis.

The Hon. H.M. GIROLAMO: A final question regarding freedom of information. This section excludes the Freedom of Information Act 1991 from being applied in relation to documents and data from designated devices. I understand the intent of this section is to exclude members of the public from accessing camera footage and GPS data. What does this mean to motor driver instructors wishing to access their own documents, data, information, camera footage or GPS data?

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN: I am advised that the footage, in line with the answer to the previous question, would remain the property of the Crown and therefore is not considered to be the footage belonging to the instructor. Other documents would be covered under usual FOI requirements.

Clause as amended passed.

Remaining clauses (13 to 21), schedule and title passed.

Bill reported with amendment.

Third Reading

The Hon. C.M. SCRIVEN (Minister for Primary Industries and Regional Development, Minister for Forest Industries) (16:52): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.