Mr DEAN ( Windermere ) - Madam President, just to begin with I would like to recognise the other members of this committee and the very insightful manner and way in which our chairman was able to direct us through this whole process.

As the chairman has said, it was a long drawn-out process. It went out over a two-year period but at the end I think that we have an extremely good result in the report that has been produced. In that regard I would like to recognise our Secretary, Mr Nathan Fewkes. He did an excellent job and I think that it shows the calibre of the people that we have in this Council that he was able to work so well with us and be instrumental in producing a lot of the report and putting us on to the right witnesses and organising everything for us. It was exceptional. I hope that he would get to see it in Hansard.

There are a couple of issues to touch on. The matter raised by the honourable member for Mersey about the vehicles parked on the side of the road was not part of the terms of reference. In the most part that is a local government matter. Most of those vehicles are on local government roads. However some are on the main roads and it is a problem. It needs to be fixed. I can remember a motion went through Launceston City Council to get control of it and try to fix things up. It is a problem and it needs to be addressed.

Mr Gaffney - Through you, Madam President - Vince Taskunas has also raised that with the RACT and they are working with DIER. It is interesting to note that within municipal council areas where councils have by-laws over their roads, we issue infringement notices saying, 'Please move your vehicle' or, 'This is not appropriate', but we do not have any jurisdiction over the State road that runs through the municipality, and that is a bit of an issue for us.

Mr DEAN - No, so it was not raised. And the second point you raised was -

Mr Gaffney - Eighty kilometre zones.

Mr DEAN - Yes, once again I do not recall any evidence being given to our committee on that. If it was I stand to be corrected -

Ms Forrest - There was some discussion, but there wasn't much about that, I think.

Mr DEAN - No, it might have been raised. And I agree it is a concern and my understanding of it is that DIER's position is saying either 100 kph or 110 or whatever it is, sends the message through to people that they can all of a sudden speed up to 100 or up to whatever the limit is and that is not what it is about. What they are saying is you then continue to drive at what you believe to be safe for the circumstances, so if it is wet with inclement conditions, for instance, and you are going through a 60 zone or an 80 zone and suddenly you come to 100, some people automatically just speed up to 100, irrespective of the road conditions that apply at the time. I think that is one reason, but there could be others.

Ms Forrest - Through you, Madam President - that is a non-argument, in my mind, from DIER's point of view because whenever drivers come across a sign that says 100 or 110, it would suggest by that comment that most people speed up to 100 or 110 regardless of the road conditions on any road, not just the end 80 or end 60 zone.

Mr DEAN - I agree with that comment. But certainly some do, which gives them that message and that has some impact upon them to at least speed up. The matters raised by the member for Western Tiers in relation to cyclists, and he is not here now but he is right, the cyclists today are in huge numbers on our roads and the weekend was a good example driving around Launceston where I noticed families on these extended bikes -

Ms Rattray - Tandems.

Ms Forrest - They have a little trailer behind for kids.

Mr DEAN - They are a sort of a tandem, but I saw a number of families out on them, and I have not seen those numbers in previous times, using the bike lanes that are now coming up all over the place, which is great. So we do need some good strong legislation and I would urge DIER and other people responsible to take that on board with the recommendations that we have made in relation to trying to improve the position of cyclists. Having said that, Madam President, they are their own worst enemy in many instances, because you will see them flitting around all over the place, not obeying the laws, and they are subject to the traffic laws in exactly the same way as motorists. But there are some who do not realise that and understand that, and I think it would be fairly draconian for police to get out there and start booking them, but there certainly needs to be a good educational program in the future.

I am not going to go over the matters that have been referred to by our chairman. I do not see the need for that, but I will refer briefly to a number of areas. All changes that we are seeing in relation to traffic safety, the changes that the police make to the way they police, all make a difference in my view. They all make some difference to road safety. Some of course are tried and then put aside because they are not getting the result that the police or DIER or others would expect, and they keep going back to the drawing board. So very clearly all organisations are wanting to make the road safer, there is no doubt about that at all. That is the sole ambition of all people, including the Government, with their funding. We are all trying to make the road safer, and that should always be recognised.

Having said that, the culture being bred into police at one stage was that bookings were the real way to go, that you needed heaps of bookings to try to drill the road safety message through to people. They were concentrating on it, and they were openly saying quantity is better than quality. We want quantity, we want bookings, and hence they started giving police quotas to get x number of bookings per day, per week, per night et cetera. I am glad to be able to say that culture seems to be changing with the new command that we have and there is a fairly strong move away from it where they are now looking at other ways, other areas and other issues.

Ms Forrest - They were getting their quota yesterday afternoon on the Midland Highway, I can tell you. Every time I went past they had someone pulled up.

Mr DEAN - I am not saying that people should not be booked, Madam President. There are times when people should be booked but there are many times when it is a better ploy not to do that and it is a safer way to go, a better way to go.

Throughout our road safety inquiry, lots of evidence was given to us on lots of issues by many very highly qualified and professional people in this area. There were some interesting characters, I might add. One was Mr Will Hagan whom some of you would know. He talks on ABC radio a lot about car activities and races and so on. An interesting character himself when you starting talking to him as to the way he sees things. We had a lot of interesting witnesses.

Madam President, a number of years ago the police service had a dedicated traffic branch. Their responsibility was solely traffic. Other matters they would attend to if they came across them or had to, of course, but it was a traffic branch. A number of years ago we would have had about 50 to 60 motorcycles out and about on our roads and stationed in Hobart, Launceston, Burnie, with a couple up in Devonport. Now, the number of motorcycles in Tasmania Police you could probably count on the fingers of your two hands. Insurance costs and so on almost make them prohibitive. But there is nothing more effective than a police officer on a motorcycle. The motorcycle is highly visible; it has a real controlling effect on people. I would certainly like to see a return to that although I do not think it will happen. There will be a few on the roads, as we see now, occasionally, but it would be wonderful to see us returning to that period with more motorcycles on our roads.

Mr Parkinson - I think visible cars that are marked appropriately are just as effective.

Mr DEAN - They are almost but I still think that the motorcycle is the most visible. The candy-coloured cars are very good but other police cars seem to meld in with other emergency service vehicles.

Mr Parkinson - There is also the danger factor with motorcycles.

Mr DEAN - Sure, and there were some fairly horrific police accidents in relation to motorcycles back in those times, which is probably another thing that influenced them in that regard.

Madam President, what came out during our inquiry on a number of occasions was publicity around road safety and how we should be managing that and what we should be doing with it and the impact that it has on people who watch television and listen to radio. Some of the slogans have been extremely good and one slogan in particular that we are told has worked extremely well is '100 is a limit, not a challenge.' People talk about it and it seems to be having an impact. There is another road safety advertisement that I was not aware of called the pinkie. I think they have it in Victoria and refer to it as the pinkie message.

Mr Wing - Is this to do with road safety?

Members laughing.

Mr DEAN -Yes, it very clearly is to do with road safety and hooning and speed. On the advertisement there are two vehicles parked at an intersection.

Ms Forrest - I'll tell you something interesting about this one in a minute.

Madam PRESIDENT - Only if it is relevant to the report.

Mr DEAN - You have three or four young girls in one car stopped at the traffic lights. In the other car next to it is a hoon who is a real revhead and he is up and down on the accelerator and the car is fairly bouncing ready for the take-off. One of the girls puts her hand out the window and sticks up her small finger. That is indicating of course that he has a very small penis to do that sort of thing. They say that that sort of advertisement works.

Ms Forrest - Through you, Madam President - I had a discussion with someone who has looked at these ads and there has been some work done at Hellyer College by a student doing a study. She was looking at advertisements and how they work and that was one she looked at. She engaged other students to comment on it and a lot of them found it pointless, until she changed the music. It was daggy music so far as the young people who saw it, so she changed the music and suddenly it was seen as a much more effective ad. There are a whole lot of things that go into advertisements such as that.

Mr DEAN - I thank the member for making that statement. That is interesting because yesterday I was involved in the interviewing of students at Launceston in relation to the Launceston Scholarship and Bursary. One of the questions asked of a young member there was, 'What would you do to reduce the incidence of crashes and fatalities on Tasmanian roads, particularly involving young people?'. One of the first comments he made was, 'We need good, strong advertisements, we need a lot of publicity and we need those that will really impact'. He used the word 'gory'. He said, 'We need gory advertisements. They really do make an impression and we talk about it'. This was a sixteen-year-old boy going on to uni next year. He said, 'We talk about those sorts of advertisements. Wherever we are, if we are in a vehicle we talk about it and it really does have an impact'. I think it is a very strong message that came to our committee about the need to get these things right and get something happening that they will take notice of. He also raised the issue of the financial side of things. He said, 'Young kids driving vehicles are hard-pressed for money and very clearly if you offer some financial incentive - that is, if you can get through your Ls and Ps without having committed any offence at all you get some reimbursement of the cost to get your licence. That would impact as well'. That is how a young person saw this.

Ms Forrest - That is happening, that is part of the scheme now.

Mr DEAN - I do not know how well it is operating or how well it is known.

Ms Forrest - Through you, Madam President - we did talk about that in the briefing we had, that it is not particularly well known because it has only just come into operation. It has not been there long enough to fit the criteria or to get the refunds yet.

Mr DEAN - It will be interesting to see how we go about that, the publicising of it, letting people know about it. The young boy did not know a lot about it at all and it needs to be brought out in the open and spoken of.

The committee did not agree on everything. There were some dissenters from time to time, some issues that I had concerns about and raised with the committee. One was the matter that was raised by the member for Western Tiers, the 100 kph limit. I had a different view from the other members of the committee on that; I had the view that the member for Western Tiers had. However, I accepted the decision of the committee in this instance. My position is that I think we have got it pretty right, but there was a difference of view there in relation to that matter. There was another difference of view we had, and I will speak a little more on that in a moment, and that is in relation to exceeding 0.05. With regard to reducing speed limits, I guess it is all very well to say we need to reduce it to 100 kph where it is 110 kph on the Midland Highway, but we would then need to look at trucks. They are currently only allowed to do 100 kph, so would we need to look at their speed limit and reduce that to 90 kph? Where do you go with some of these issues? I think the Midland Highway, with the greatest respect to the other members of the committee, is perfectly safe to do 110 kph on in many places, probably the biggest percentage of it.

Mr Wing - We didn't say it was unsafe, but the recommendation was that it be 100 kph unless an expert body authorised it to be increased to 110 kph.


Sitting suspended from 4 p.m. to 4.30 p.m.


Mr DEAN - The matter of Cleveland has been canvassed quite well by the chairman of the committee -

Mr Wilkinson - Only quite well? Very well.

Mr DEAN - Yes, very well, there is no doubt about that, and the anomaly that really exists between there and some other areas. The only thing that I wanted to say - and I was going to try to say it by way of interjection but I did not quite get it in - is that when we spoke to the DIER personnel involved, very clearly their body language was that they were reasonably embarrassed about it. That was the body language that you could gauge from the way they were answering some of our questions. One of them who is known very well to me very clearly indicated that they were uncomfortable with some of the suggestions that we were making as to why there was that inconsistency in that area and some of the other areas, et cetera.

One reason indicated to us why there was that inconsistency was that there was a mature-aged couple living there and they had to get out onto the highway. If that is the criterion in itself and alone to reduce a speed limit from 110 kph to 80 kph then really I do not quite understand the situation. I would suggest that not many others here would either.

Ms Forrest - Have you got a right-of-way to get out of your driveway? I'm a bit worried about you now.

Mr DEAN - You are right. The chairman makes a good point, that along Mangalore if you look at the number of houses that front right on the road, there are just as many as there are at Cleveland.

Ms Forrest - More.

Mr DEAN - I counted them last night at Cleveland and I think it is three that really have a close frontage to the highway.

Mr Wing - And there are only about seven altogether at Cleveland.

Mr DEAN - That is right. It really needs looking at very seriously. If the criterion for dropping the speed limit is that of a mature-aged person needing to come out on the road, then where else does it apply in Tasmania? I would say it would apply in many other places. It just seems to be an unreasonable action by DIER and they ought to revisit it and get it right.

Variable speed limits have been mentioned by the chairman. The only thing that I want to say there is that Victoria seems to be the benchmark in relation to variable speed limits. They have many of them operating now. The Western Ring Road, the West Gate Bridge, the new highway that has been developed between the West Gate Bridge and into Melbourne, now have all got variable speed limit signs. You cannot miss the illuminated lights showing the speed limit, whereas you can miss a lot of the ones we have here if you are concentrating on the road, or a vehicle in front, or whatever. Very clearly there is a lot we can do in this State in relation to illuminating our speed limit signs and to also having variable speed limit signs. The chairman has mentioned that in relation to the classic case from Mangalore through to Brighton. At 11 o'clock the week before last I drove through there and there was not a cat or a dog to be seen anywhere and getting along at 60 kph for quite a long period -

Mr Wilkinson - It's the fastest-growing young family area in Tasmania.

Mr DEAN - No, this is before you get into Brighton.

Ms Forrest - Mangalore.

Mr DEAN - I have no problem with Brighton, as that is reasonable, but it is the area leading into Brighton that is the problem, and Campbell Town and all of these other areas. A variable speed limit sign would fix those problems and the public would accept it, listen to it and abide by it.

Mr Wilkinson - A bypass could help too.

Mr DEAN - Yes, it would, wouldn't it? The roadworks signs have been referred to and there are many examples of where there have been signs left up after works have been completed and traffic has totally ignored them and so on. I gave the example once before of where I was driving down from Launceston, grass was being mowed beside the road, one area had up a 60 kph sign and it was a 110 kph zone. So it was 110 back to 60 and then about another 20 kilometres down the road, or further than that - it was Stoner, in fact - doing the identical thing off the side of the road, mowing or something like that. So I range DIER on that occasion and pointed out these two situations. They did agree it was an error, that the persons working on these sites did not understand which signs needed to be put out et cetera.

Ms Forrest - It is not working, is it?

Mr DEAN - No, it is obviously not working. So they need to do a lot more in relation to that.

The chairman indicated that I would talk a little more on alcohol. It has been raised and it has been mentioned. Alcohol is a contributor in many serious crashes and fatalities, we all know that, and this an area where I differed from the rest of the committee. I believe that the timing is probably right to reduce it to 0.03. The rest of the committee did not quite see it that way and I can understand and accept the position that they have identified within our report, because when you do these things, the public have to able to accept it. A question that kept coming up was, would the public accept it at this stage, at this time and are they ready to accept that? Probably they are not but I think when you start to look at the number of serious crashes and fatalities that alcohol is involved in, then you have a pretty strong basis on which to try to sell that message.

So what happens now is that people tend to play Russian roulette with the 0.05. They will calculate their drinks and they will try to work out what they have had and then work out from that, that they are under 0.05 and then they will drive. I had a lady do that the other night who rang me for assistance. A lovely person, living in a country area, a horse trainer and no convictions except one for, I think she said, speeding, that she had a long time ago. She was devastated because she had been at a function in Trevallyn where she calculated her drinks. She said she was very careful because her licence is virtually her life and she needs it for work and where she is living. She said she miscalculated and the reason she miscalculated was that she did not take into account that two or three of the drinks that she had through the night, over a long period, had been topped up and she said she really had not considered that. She believes that is what put her over the limit. She was probably right, because she was only just over 0.05 and the police happened to be there at the wrong time, as she said, as she was backing out of the driveway to drive off. She is now confronted with the position of probably losing her licence, but I am trying to help her and support her moving forward. But this is what happens with 0.05.

Mr Wing - Did you ask her views about 0.03?

Mr DEAN - No, I did not. But what I would say, is that if it was 0.03, people would know or should know that you can have one drink and that would be it.

Mr Wilkinson - In an hour and then it would take three hours to dissipate, that is the rule of thumb.

Mr DEAN - But normally you would have one drink and if you had any more than that you would be running a real risk. With 0.05 it is different, you can have three or four drinks. Some people cannot.

Mr Wilkinson - No, you cannot.

Mr DEAN - It depends what it is. You can, with light beer -

Mr Wilkinson - It depends over what period of time.

Mr DEAN - You are right. So it is a bit of a game of Russian roulette. That, to me, really is causing some of the things that are happening.

Mr Wilkinson - That is what I am saying, the wrong messages are out there, I believe, in relation to drink-driving.

Mr DEAN - You are right, I do not disagree with that at all.

Mr Wing - Through you, Madam President - would you like to touch on the question of testing for drugs?

Mr DEAN - I will touch on that in a moment. I have a point here to raise.

I am going to refer to a quote in the report at page 86, which is an interesting one. I will read it. This is a statement made Mr Steve Richardson, who gave evidence to our committee - I am trying think of Mr Richardson's qualifications but it escapes me at the present time, one of the other members might recall what it was. This is what he says:

'The capacity for the brain to cope with any amount of alcohol varies from day to day. It varies from individual to individual. The amount of alcohol that a person takes into their system will also vary from day to day to get to that limit. It is not a measurable risk. The driver is unable to say, "I've had two beers this afternoon; they were light beers, so I should be right to drive home." '

That is the point that I am making. It is very difficult to assess. That is with a limit like 0.05 but with a limit like 0.03, I think it would be much easier to work it all out.

It is interesting if you look at the graph on page 82 of the report. The heading is:

'Relative Crash Risk and Blood Alcohol Concentration'.

If you look at that graph, what the graph is really saying to you is that you are not at your best for driving until you have had a couple of beers.

Ms Thorp - Lies, lies and statistics.

Mr DEAN - You start here and you drop off and then you start and come up. It is between, and this is why I say 0.03 because between 0.02 and 0.04 the graph starts to go up. That is the impact of alcohol on you as a person. When you look at 0.05, 0.06, it is well and truly on the way up. It is an interesting graph there for people to look at.

We know, as the member for Launceston said, that in some European countries the limit is 0.02, 0.03 and 0 in one or two countries but in the majority it is 0.05 and 0.08. That is sending a fairly strong message to us at this stage. Young males, and I am not sure if the member for Launceston mentioned this, are very clearly over represented in fatal crashes involving alcohol and therefore immediate steps are necessary to address this matter. The age at which young persons can have any alcohol in their body needs to be raised as a priority. I am talking about the 17 to 25 age bracket.

Evidence was given to us, and good evidence, that that age group is vulnerable to crashes, serious crashes and fatalities involving alcohol. If DIER are aware of that statistic, which they should be - and they would have read this report and they probably worked out and looked at all the evidence that we were given on this - one would think that they would be taking immediate action; putting this on the priority list, I would have thought. We know on the evidence we were given - and there is no reason not to accept that evidence - that it is a problem. I would urge DIER - and I think the committee would urge DIER - to consider this and do something about it, to take positive action.

Mr Wing - I mentioned the matter but not specifically males.

Mr DEAN - Right. The evidence given to us was young males, was it not. I urge DIER to really consider it. Action needs to be taken. We cannot just say, that is going to happen, let us keep going the way we are. It is not acceptable in my view. We can do something about it. Other places are looking at it and have taken action.

Repeat drink-drivers is another area. Our committee has made a strong recommendation here that drivers convicted three times or more should undergo alcohol testing and treatment before they are able to get their licence back. I think that is very reasonable in the circumstances, because if a person is convicted three times of DUI they are very clearly exhibiting that they do not care, that they probably have an alcohol problem and they are a danger on the roads. Something needs to happen there in a positive way to ensure these people are a reasonable risk when their licence is returned and they can start driving again.

[4.45 p.m.]
That is an issue that we have raised and looked at. Recidivist drivers are a real problem; in fact are lethal weapons on our roads. Some have been convicted two or three times and have come backwards and forwards before the courts. It is just not acceptable. I am not sure whether the member for Launceston mentioned the interlock situation -

Mr Wing - I mentioned the matter.

Mr DEAN - but very clearly this is going to be the way of the future. It is being trialled now in the courts, and we have made strong recommendations there about the courts and their position in relation to interlocks. It will not be long, I would think, before there is a system in all new cars where you have to provide a sample of your breath or fingerprints or something to access your car and get your car mobile. I think that will come in time with all of the advances being made in technology and changes in vehicles. That, I think, is a good way forward. Novice drivers have been touched on, and the member for Murchison will very clearly touch on this one as well so I will not go into that anymore at this stage.

I just wanted to mention here, Madam President, a position that Victoria have just adopted. This is how seriously they take the position of young people involved in serious crashes and fatalities. It was in the Examiner on 26 October of this year, and it is headed 'Road centre'. Others probably read it as well, and I will just quote the comment in the paper:

'A $50 million interactive road trauma centre will be built in Melbourne to scare young people into driving safely. The centre will include graphic road accident simulations and presentations from emergency service officers, rehabilitation workers and victims, as well as a road toll memorial. Learner-drivers will be given incentives to attend the centre and young people in rural and regional areas will be eligible for assistance to take part.'

So that is what Victoria is doing. They are going to shock young drivers into accepting what can happen on the roads through speed and alcohol and all of those things, by spending a large amount of money, $50 million, in setting up that centre to send that very strong and clear message to drivers of vehicles.

Drugs is an interesting one and in fact Victoria have done quite a lot of work on this. It has been suggested in one article I read from Victoria that they believe there are almost as many drivers on the roads that are impacted on by drugs as there are impacted on by alcohol. It is an article I read. Now whether that is right or not, I do not know, but very clearly drugs, in my opinion, play a bigger part in some of the road issues and problems that we have than is probably really known. There is a graph here which identifies drug testing. This is an issue I have raised in this Chamber previously as well, and it does concern me. I think our report identifies the number of drug testing devices that have been purchased by the police service over a period of time, against the number used, and there is a huge difference. In other words, the numbers purchased have not been used out on the road. But in 2005-06, as the report says on page 91, 272 oral fluid tests were conducted. In 2009-10, 565 were conducted. That is for the State over 365 days, so it is very few when you look at it over the State. Less than two oral drug tests are done per day for motor vehicle drivers et cetera, and if we compare that with the random breath-testing one, there is a huge difference.

Ms Thorp - Through you, Madam President - they have access to those tests and the police make the choice to use them when they believe someone is acting or behaving in a way that makes them suspect they might be drunk or whatever. Then they try the breathalyser and if the breathalyser comes back zero or under and they are still not convinced, that is when they use the drug one.

Mr DEAN - The situation, as I see it and as others see it, is that they ought to be giving the oral fluid test, in other words, not wait until they exhibit some sign that they might be affected by drugs, but probably give it to them in the first instance. There is no reason why they should not. It is the same as alcohol. When they are breath-testing people for alcohol they do not have to smell alcohol and they do not have to -

Ms Thorp - True, but it's extraordinarily time consuming and very expensive.

Mr Wilkinson - Through you, Madam President - in relation to drugs, the half life of at least cannabis can stay in your system for up to three months -

Ms Thorp - That is right, and the police are interested in getting dangerous drugs -

Mr Wilkinson - Therefore if you are tested you come back and offend against that law it could be for a smoke of cannabis, even though it is contrary to the law, but three months earlier and they say that that does not affect your driving capabilities at all. They have to, I think, refine the testing procedure. Once they refine it to see if it is an amount that affects driving, that is when the proper penalties, I believe, should come into play.

Ms Thorp - Through you, Madam President - the police have told me on numerous occasions - and we passed the law through here not that long ago about drug-driving - about the frustration they experience when they pull someone up on a random breath test and when they test them they do not go over the limit but their eyes are glassy, they are speaking strangely or whatever.

Mr DEAN - Madam President, I want to quote from our report in relation to the oral fluid testing and it identifies with the position I gave a moment ago:

'However, with OFT devices at around $50 each, there is a capacity (based on the figures above)' -

That is, the figures I referred to -

'to conduct a greater number of OFTs. For example, expending $63,500 in 2008-09 on tests at around $50 each in theory should have been sufficient to purchase over 1,200 devices yet only 412 OFTs were carried out.'

I have spoken to police in relation to this - and they cannot be identified, unfortunately - and they say they would like to perform more OFT testing but there are certain restrictions and issues with which they must comply. It is an issue and one that we need to address.

The other area of concern is in relation to prescription drugs. Evidence was given to the committee and I want to read a quote from the report on page 91:

'I have a very serious concern about the number of people driving on the road while on prescription medication that they should not be on the road with. … They drive there because no-one says that if you are on heavy levels of Valium or whatever, you should not be driving a motor vehicle.'

I think that was a comment made by a Ms Jacqualine Watchman. It is interesting that those sorts of comments are being made in relation to prescription drugs. Following on from that, I will read another quote from the report:

'The Act does not state which party has the onus of proof with respect to medications... It appears the onus of proof remains with the prosecution, providing the defence can raise sufficient evidence as to the existence of prescriptions, medical advice and so forth. This view is based on the fact that the Act is silent about the onus of proof on this issue and yet, by contrast, specifically creates a statutory assumption about the efficacy of blood tests for prescribed illicit drugs (s.23A). Parliament's intention is not clear from Hansard.

The review recommended, amongst several other changes to the Act, that it should be "amended to clarify the licit administration of substances."'

So I would hope that it is considered and taken on board. It needs to be clarified.

Off-road motorcycles, the chairman has covered that well. I am not sure whether the member for Launceston mentioned the fact that Dr Garry Fettke, the orthopaedic surgeon, indicated that off-road motorcycle crash injuries were 10 to 15 times more than that of motor vehicle injuries.

Mr Wing - I did, but it's good to re-emphasise it.

Mr DEAN - That is a huge number of people. You can imagine what would be happening if the number of persons injured in motor vehicles increased another 10 or 15 times. You could imagine what would be happening. Here we have this orthopaedic surgeon who has a good knowledge of what is happening, saying that those are the numbers. It is a big issue and it needs addressing. The number of people now using these types of bikes off-road is increasing rapidly and we now know that we have a lot of people from Victoria coming across to Tasmania specifically to undertake this activity. We were given evidence through the committee of the damage that is occurring within the bush and conservation areas in relation to this type of bike riding. There is a huge amount of damage so a lot of work needs to be done in this area, both from a legal perspective to make sure people are protected and covered if they do have a crash because currently many would not be. They would be unlicensed, they would be unregistered and they would have no support or protection in the future. It is an area that needs a lot of consideration.

Cyclists have been covered. There is an interesting one on the headlights. Few are aware that the current law requires, in inclement weather conditions, to turn headlights on. That is the law and you do not have any option. They will say that it is up to them when they put their headlights on but it is not. The law is very clear. It says in inclement weather and certain conditions that you must put your headlights on and you can be booked if you do not.

Ms Forrest - The police need to pull them all over to get the message out there.

Mr DEAN - They do and you are absolutely right, there needs to be education on that. There needs to be in wet weather police, for instance, pulling up and having -

Ms Forrest - If you drive around Launceston in the winter time, at any stage, it is foggy as anything.

Mr DEAN - Yes.

Mr Parkinson - It's about time we had cars in Australia with lights that operate automatically.

Mr DEAN - That happens with the Volvo and it happens with some of the others. I think with the new Audi now you have a ring of lights on permanently. A lot of people will say that it is not a good idea because if there is an emergency or some other reason to have your lights on people are not as inclined to take as much notice of it. That is what some will say and that is the answer they give and whether it is right or not I do not know.

Mr Parkinson - I was in Canada quite a number of years ago now and all the cars had that system then.

Mr DEAN - Yes. With demerit points - and I tried to find it in our report - we did consider whether or not there would be double demerit point days in this State and we found on the evidence that we had that we could not really substantiate it. The evidence that we got from Victoria and whether or not the member for Murchison or -

Ms Forrest - There were some submissions.

Mr DEAN - We considered I think at the end of the day that we ought not go down the path of introducing double demerit point days on holidays or some other particular days. We felt that we were well serviced by what is currently happening.

Mobile phones was another interesting one and we have said we need to get greater publicity on this because the new rules, when the laws changed about 12 months ago we were convinced as a committee I think that perhaps we had not got the message out there to enough people to identify very clearly what the current laws are in relation to the use of mobile phones. Clearly that law is being ignored and you see time and time again people on their phones yakking and driving, but there are other things in motor vehicles that cause concerns as well. It is not just mobile phones, it is all the other fittings and electronic devices that we have that in my opinion need to be considered and looked at and we have said that in our report. We have asked that more work be done to look at all areas that can take the attention of a driver off the road.

[5.00 p.m.]
I think the member for Launceston covered speed cameras pretty well under tolerance. I think there should always be a tolerance, that is my opinion, because currently you have drivers saying you are concentrating on your speedometer too much. If there is a little bit of flexibility there, then you can probably get your eyes back where they ought to be, on the road and what is happening around you, rather than watching your speedometer because not all vehicles have cruise control or whatever it is. So they say that there needs to be a bit of a tolerance there and, as I said, I agree with that.

Mr Wing - I did not touch on the Auditor-General's report on that about location and times of day.

Mr DEAN - I did have that written down. It is very apt that we had a look at this report and for members to remember what the Auditor-General said in relation to speed cameras. What he was really saying in that report is that not much science or statistical data was being used in relation to the placement of cameras. In other words, and I cannot remember exactly the times now, but a certain period of an evening and certain days of the week, there were more serious crashes and fatalities than any other time, but the placement of cameras did not correlate with those times. They were being used at other times in other areas in other ways. So he was saying that camera placement needs to be scientifically done and that there is evidence there to demonstrate when, how, why and where they should be used et cetera. The Auditor-General made a very good finding in relation to that and in fairness to the new Commissioner, I think Mr Hine has said that he has used some of that data in camera placement but he made the statement that he will be more conscious of it in future. So that is a good result and that is a good position.

Point-to-point cameras were referred to and, from memory, the evidence was that the pricing was being considered and there is work being done around that. In other words, where a camera is set up in one area, then you have another camera another 10 or 20 kilometres down the road and there is an average speed worked out between the two cameras on the vehicle. It passes through here, it is identified, sends the message through to the camera another 10 to 20 kilometres down the road and when the car gets to that camera it works out the average speed of that vehicle going between those two points. That is being used on the mainland and other places and they say it is an extremely good device. Drivers, when they see cameras now, on occasions, and drivers will tell you this, will simply speed up and away they go because they are not expecting to get another camera before they get to Hobart if they are leaving Launceston. So that is an area that is being considered and it is good to see that happening.

Madam President, they are the only issues I wanted to raise and I just want to thank the member for Launceston again for his hard work in relation to this. The member for Murchison also went across to the mainland off her own bat on one occasion to look at parts of this as well.

Mr Wing - At her own expense.

Mr DEAN - At her own expense, as did our chairman as well. So that identifies the capacity of our members, when we have these committees, to make sure that we do the very best to get the best evidence and the best information to bring it forward. Hang their own expense at the end of the day.

I thank all members for their contributions, and the member for Huon, for their input and the way this turned out. It is a great report and yes, it is a voluminous report. But when you consider we dealt with about 16 separate matters here, it is not surprising it is a fairly large report. I would urge all members to really read this report because it does identify a lot of issues and matters that we should be attending to and things we should be changing.