HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Fourth Parliament, Second Session (54-2)
2021-08-26 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Rail Safety National Law (South Australia) (Alcohol and Drug Offence) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 24 June 2021.)

The Hon. E.S. BOURKE (16:59): I rise to speak on the Rail Safety National Law (South Australia) (Alcohol and Drug Offence) Amendment Bill 2021. I will be the lead speaker for the opposition on this bill. This rail safety legislation is created with the specific aim of keeping our community safe and connected.

Drug and alcohol testing regimes exist to protect everyone in our community, not only workers but those who use or employ the services of those workers. Testing for substance use is also not an unfamiliar concept in the workplace. It is common practice in other industries such as construction, security, police and civil aviation, as well as many other areas where safety risks need to be minimised.

The Rail Safety National Law (South Australia) Act 2012, in partnership with the Rail Safety National Law (South Australia) (Drug and Alcohol Testing) Regulations 2012, provided a direction in regard to the procedures that an authorised person is required to adhere to when testing a rail safety worker, the time that is required for that test and the inability for a worker to refuse or fail to comply with the requirement or direction of testing.

As I mentioned previously, these types of guidelines are not uncommon in other industries where safety is paramount. The proposed amendments allow for more specific definitions which will aid in increasing the safety of the worker.

Proposed amendments to section 128 insert subsection (1a), which defines when a worker is considered to be 'carrying out, or attempting to carry out' rail safety work. According to the bill, when a worker is signed on and available for duty they are considered to be carrying out rail safety work, regardless of whether the work is actually carried out at a specific moment.

This is because it is not always clear when a worker has begun rail safety work—they could simply be attending another task associated with their role that is not deemed a safety-related role. These amendments are complementary to other amendments I mentioned before, which refer to the timing of the drug and alcohol tests.

It is been suggested in the other place that the proposed amendments to this legislation resemble similar provisions in the Civil Aviation Regulations. Like this bill, those regulations outline a comparable definition of when a safety sensitive activity is considered to be 'carried out'. And, like in the other industries, these stricter guidelines aid in protecting employees and others connected to the work being done.

Strict guidelines on the use and the effect of alcohol and drugs are essential in keeping workers safe and protected. This amendment bill seeks to clarify some of the terms to strengthen the existing national framework. The opposition is pleased to support this bill. Drug and alcohol testing is integral to workplace safety in this country and the proposed amendments support the national framework already in place.

The Hon. F. PANGALLO (17:02): I rise to speak in support of the Rail Safety National Law (South Australia) (Alcohol and Drug Offence) Amendment Bill. I understand that the bill quite simply clarifies that, for the purposes of alcohol and drug-related testing and thus possible offences, a rail safety worker will be taken to be carrying out rail safety work when they have arrived at their place of work and have signed on and are available or otherwise on duty.

Workers who have only turned up but not signed on—that is, they have not commenced rail safety work—are not regarded as carrying out rail safety work yet. Apparently, until now, there has been ambiguity around the interpretation of when a worker has begun rail safety work. This has made it difficult to prosecute a worker for a breach of the alcohol and drug testing that is part of their safety management system.

South Australia, as the lead legislator for the national law, now needs to pass this legislation to ensure that Rail Safety National Law is consistent in each state and territory. It also brings rail and safety provisions into line with similar provisions in the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations 1998 and ensures that rail laws are nationally consistent.

I understand that alcohol and drug testing in the rail industry is carried out to a very high standard, and that there are very few breaches of these stringent safety requirements by employers and employees. That is a comforting fact, given the numbers of precious passengers and quantities of freight carried by rail each year in our state. I was particularly pleased to learn at the briefing given on the bill that the new private rail operators are equally as vigilant as the public sector in conducting and monitoring alcohol and drug testing to ensure that safety standards are maintained throughout our network.

As members of this place and South Australian constituents know, I am a strong advocate for rail in South Australia, and have been an outspoken critic of successive government's failures to maintain or expand our rail network. For instance, we saw what happened with the Overland passenger train between Adelaide and Melbourne, where the Victorian government has had to subsidise this popular service. In terms of freight, the Port Lincoln grain train was abandoned by Viterra because it did not want to spend money on upgrading that rail line.

Of course, we know that there are impacts for having less rail in the state—safety, for instance. It means there are more trucks and cars on our roads, more fatigued drivers, not subject to the same safety standards and safety management systems. You have the situation of roads infrastructure versus rail infrastructure, and the lack of upkeep of both. It also impacts on the cost of freight and on the efficiency of rail.

Tourism opportunities for rail seem to be very limited in South Australia compared with interstate—the Northern Territory, Western Australia and Victoria. We have no internal rail passenger tourism infrastructure to places like the Flinders and the Barossa, where plans to establish a tourist wine train by Chateau Tanunda's John Geber were derailed by the previous transport minister, when a section of the line was inexplicably ripped up. Transport minister Corey Wingard has ruled out a major spur line connecting Mount Barker to the existing line running through the Hills and then on into Adelaide because of costs.

This is an expanding region with thousands of new homes on the drawing board, yet there is no effective transport strategy for future generations. It puts enormous pressure on the South Eastern Freeway—a lottery to travel upon at the best of times and on any given day. Mount Barker is expanding at a great rate, it is virtually a satellite city, but the only way into town is down that freeway, and we have seen the problems and congestion, almost on a daily basis, caused by cars and that endless line of trucks.

If there is a government bold enough to build a bypass for freight, I am sure it can work. People in the Hills want a new line, and it may well be an election issue next year. This opposition by Minister Wingard and his rail-hating bureaucrats in his department is very short sighted; hence their privatisation of the metropolitan network—they just do not want to know it.

Rail is the backbone of efficient freight and passenger transport in just about every developed country around the world, and in other countries not as well developed, and, of course, in other mainland states of the federation. But why not in South Australia—one of the largest states in the country. It really makes no sense at all.

We have a government more concerned about winning metropolitan seats and spending more money on intersections that save a fraction of minutes for commuters in cars. We can see how useful rail is in the Eastern States, and there are major infrastructure projects, like the $15 billion inland rail that will connect Melbourne to Brisbane. It is underway and it represents a great nation-building exercise. The Victorian government has committed billions to expanding and revitalising its magnificent network of rail throughout their tiny state, but here there is no vision at all. They just want to patch up our crumbling roads that are being pulverised by incessant road trains.

It is obligatory for governments to provide transport services, including rail, not jettison them off to the private sector. Regional South Australia will never reach its true potential if the state government continues to abandon rail as an efficient and reliable mode of transport. A rail advocate, Michael Kohler, wrote to me recently and here is a portion of what he had to say:

I know Frank is aware of the Marshall Government's hardnosed decision to not support a Bill to protect the Barossa Valley rail corridor. [The Department for Infrastructure and Transport] wants to cover over the rail line at a location called Altona which is about 2 km's out of Lyndoch on the way to Tanunda.

The road passes over a railway cutting at Altona and once it has been filled in and a realigned road put over it then that spells doom for the line and no chance of any future use as a commuter service to Gawler from the ever-increasing major Barossa Valley towns.

If we are serious about road safety, want to reduce cars on the road and global warming then this pro road attitude is not the way to go.

My second point is that a new housing estate called St Ives is being built on prime rural land just south of Roseworthy. This in itself is a disgrace but just west of this development is the ex Burra railway line which still has a connection into Gawler.

The existing line must be kept so that in time a new commuter railway station and car park can be built so residents from St Ives, Roseworthy and even out towards Freeling can utilise a commuter train service into Gawler where they could then transfer into an electric train.

With the Gawler line being electrified, more new electric trains will be introduced which means there will be a surplus of diesel/electric 3000/3100 class rail cars which could be used to both Nuriootpa and Roseworthy. This would not happen in the immediate future obviously but the thrust of this email to you is that those railway lines must be retained for future use and not ripped up or covered over.

I have written to Transport Minister Corey Wingard who is my local MP about these two matters and he is not interested.

Surprise, surprise! Mr Kohler goes on to say:

I have many friends who work in the rail industry and share my passion about the value of rail and they all agree with me that there is no rail culture in South Australia from either Liberal or Labor.

At least Labor does have a slightly better attitude when it comes to light rail (trams).

To me the Liberals ideology encourages roads, cars and road transport and people like Corey Wingard won't listen to common sense.

One of the Premier's pet quangos is Infrastructure SA. We supported it at the time because we believe they might provide visionary solutions, not just for infrastructure but also transport in our regions. Their much vaunted 20-year blueprint for the state failed to include one regional railway project. In fact, Infrastructure SA has been shown to be a rather underwhelming yawn and appears to have provided little inspiration for future infrastructure projects to be developed by the government. In closing, we support and look forward to the passage of the bill.

The PRESIDENT: Thank you, the Hon. Mr Pangallo. I will observe that you drew a very long bow with some of your remarks to the specifics of this bill. I just want you and others to observe those matters in the future. The Treasurer to conclude the debate.

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (Treasurer) (17:14): I thank honourable members for their wideranging contribution to the substance of this bill.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

Bill taken through committee without amendment.

Third Reading

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (Treasurer) (17:16): I move:

This bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT