Tony Zappia (Makin, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

I am told that at the first meeting of the Australian Automobile Association, held in Adelaide in 1924, a resolution was passed calling for uniform traffic laws and regulations across Australia. There is no question that since 1924 we have made considerable progress towards having uniform road laws throughout Australia, but as with so many other matters administered by each state or territory there are still many inconsistencies between the road laws across Australian jurisdictions. The importance of having uniform road laws across Australia should not be underestimated. Inconsistencies in road laws cause confusion, unintended breaches of road laws, road accidents and a loss of productivity.

Whilst I am conscious that this is a complex matter, in today's world, where people are regularly driving interstate and each year thousands of overseas visitors drive on our roads, uniform road laws have become a necessity. In the limited time available to me tonight I will provide some examples of the differences that I am referring to. I start with the issue of U-turns. In South Australia, Queensland, New South Wales, Western Australia and the Northern Territory you must not perform a U-turn at a signalised intersection unless there is a 'U-turn permitted' sign there. In Victoria, however, the reverse applies: U-turns are permitted at signalised intersections unless there is a 'no U-turn' sign. In the Northern Territory, the default speed limit outside of built-up areas is 110 kilometres per hour. In most other jurisdictions, it is 100 kilometres an hour. In some areas in the Northern Territory, speeds of up to 130 kilometres an hour are permitted unless a trailer is being towed, in which case it is 100 kilometres an hour. I also note that in the Northern Territory a 60 kilometre an hour speed limit applies in built-up areas; in other states a 50 kilometre per hour limit applies. Another example is Tasmania's provisions for left-turning on red after stopping at traffic lights—a law that, quite frankly, I support but which does not exist throughout most jurisdictions.

One of the areas of significant difference between the jurisdictions relates to the requirements, obligations and restrictions of learners and provisional drivers. For learners and provisional drivers—or P-platers, as they are known—variations with respect to the process, the speeds permitted, the display of P-plates, the towing of trailers, demerit point losses, motor vehicle power permissibility and even restrictions on the time of day a person can drive are prevalent across jurisdictions. I know that all these differences make it particularly difficult for young people living in communities close to state and territory borders. I understand that this became a major political issue along the New South Wales-Queensland border when in 2007 the New South Wales member for Tweed introduced a bill to address a number of anomalies relating to P-platers. At that time, it was estimated that about four million Queenslanders travelled across the border and into the Tweed each year, while approximately 50,000 Queensland vehicles crossed the border daily. Of course, there are many other differences in road laws related to bicycles, gophers, scooters and even horse riding on roads.

I turn briefly to the matter of vehicle compliance standards between jurisdictions. Again, differences exist between states and territories with respect to compliance standards, and hefty penalties can be imposed if breaches occur. I note that regulations relating to windscreen tinting, whilst fairly similar across each of the jurisdictions, can still be open to differences of interpretation by authorities because the regulations are not identically defined in each state. Victoria even has specific provisions relating to bicycle carriers. Again, I commend that state for doing so. Personally, I believe bike carriers should always be removed when the bicycles are removed as they can be very dangerous.

The last example I refer to is the difference in speed limit tolerance allowed in each jurisdiction. This is a matter that causes considerable angst to drivers. In most jurisdictions an eight to 10 per cent tolerance generally applies. In Victoria, I understand the tolerance is three per cent. Whilst I am sure that some people will argue that there should be no tolerance, common sense dictates that tolerance is applied for good reason and should be uniform.

I have little doubt that each year millions of dollars in fines are paid by motorists who unknowingly and unintentionally contravene the law. Whilst ignorance of the law is never accepted as a defence by the authorities, few motorists, if any, would be conversant with every law and every regulation relating to road use in every state and territory across Australia.

Over 60 years ago, in 1947, Australian road traffic ministers formed an Australian Road Traffic Code Committee in an attempt to establish uniform road laws across Australia. Whilst a road traffic code was established and some progress was made, the code in itself did not achieve sufficient consistency in Australian road laws. In October 1999 the National Road Transport Commission, which was succeeded by the National Transport Commission, developed a set of model rules—the Australian Road Rules—which today form a basis for state and territory road laws throughout Australia. With the establishment of the Australian Road Rules, further progress has been made towards having consistent national road rules across Australia. The National Transport Commission last year commenced a 10-year review of the Australian Road Rules. I understand the review will run for two years. The review is an important step in this process as it will enable each of the jurisdictions to assess their own application of the Australian Road Rules in addition to the national effectiveness of the Australian Road Rules.

Whilst the review is both necessary and timely, I hope it is completed as quickly as practicable and that it is not used by states and territories as an excuse to delay or defer changes that would create greater consistencies in Australia's national road laws. Whilst the Commonwealth is a signatory to the agreements underpinning the Australian Road Rules, the rules are not binding on any of the states or territories and rely entirely on the willingness of the states and territories to implement any reforms. With respect to that, I note that continuous improvements are being made to the rules and that those changes are being widely adopted by each jurisdiction.

I note with interest that transport ministers from the Commonwealth, states and territories, together with representatives from New Zealand and the Australian Local Government Association, announced in Alice Springs last Friday that the Australian Transport Council agreed to support forwarding to COAG for signature at their next meeting, scheduled for mid-2011, the intergovernmental agreements to establish the national heavy vehicle regulator. I know that this is a matter that is of keen interest to the trucking industry in this country because there would be few sectors in our community that would be conscious of the differences between the laws that apply in each state. With respect to the trucking industry, in addition to the road laws themselves there would also be laws relating to the compliance of each heavy vehicle. I also note that, when it comes to the trucking industry, they have a range of locally imposed conditions which also vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and clearly also impact on people's ability to carry out their business and in turn on their livelihood.

The ATC also agreed to accept the recommendations of independent expert panels on the unresolved policy issues to be included in heavy vehicle laws. Ministers identified a number of key areas of further work in settling heavy vehicle regulatory requirements which will need to be worked through over the next six months as the national laws are finalised. This is an important step towards developing uniformity across jurisdictions in respect of heavy vehicle regulations.

I bring this matter to the attention of the House in the hope that the federal Minister for Infrastructure and Transport might take whatever action is available to him to encourage the states and territories to implement uniform road laws throughout Australia, which I know would be welcomed by Australian motorists across this country.

See this speech in context