Download Fragment

Wednesday, 8 February 2012
Page: 367

Road Safety

Senator FISHER (South Australia) (14:37): My question is to the Minister representing the Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Senator Carr. Can the minister explain whether there is any empirical and independent evidence upon which the government relies in claiming that creating a road safety remuneration tribunal will increase road safety by increasing truck drivers' pay rates and, if so, what is that evidence?

Senator CARR (Victoria—Minister for Manufacturing and Minister for Defence Materiel) (14:37): I am sure everyone in this Senate will be concerned with the fact that 250 people are killed and over 1,000 people are seriously injured due to heavy vehicle accidents on our roads on an annual basis. Most of these deaths come about as a result of collisions with trucks. The road transport sector continues to have the highest incidence of fatal injuries compared with all other industries, with 25 deaths per 100,000 workers. From the latest statistics that have been made available to me, that is about 10 times the rate of all other industries.

The senator asked me what evidence there is that the question of road safety could be enhanced by this. Research by the National Transport Commission shows that low rates of pay can lead to risky work practices being pursued as a result of the people driving these vehicles trying to make ends meet. These risky road practices include dangerous actions such as speeding, working very long hours and using illicit drugs to stay awake. Frankly, this is a practice that cannot continue. One would have thought that everyone in this place would have shared that view. That is why the government has introduced legislation to establish a national road safety remuneration system comprising a tribunal and a separate education and compliance framework. I trust that if the legislation is passed by the parliament the tribunal will begin work on 1 July this year. Then we can test not just the research work that has been undertaken in this area but also the practical application. (Time expired)

Senator FISHER (South Australia) (14:39): Mr President, I ask a supplementary question. Can the minister explain exactly how paying truck drivers more will result in fewer road accidents and say whether the government modelled the benefits of increasing road safety by funding better roads rather than funding a specialist tribunal to increase truckies' pay?

Senator CARR (Victoria—Minister for Manufacturing and Minister for Defence Materiel) (14:40): Senator Fisher, you asked me whether or not there is any evidence that paying people more improves their performance, in effect. I do not know if you have ever supported anyone getting a pay rise, but I suspect that maybe you have not. All I urge you to do is to check the Hansard for what I have already told you, which is that there is very clear evidence that people who are forced to work on poverty wages take risks they should not have to take. If you are asking people to work for that sort of money, you have to expect that there will be action taken by people trying to preserve the livelihoods of their families. As a consequence, people work longer hours, they take drugs, they speed and they take action which is dangerous to other people. So the fact that we are asking for people to be paid a decent wage is something this government is proud of.

Honourable senators interjecting—

The PRESIDENT: I remind senators that if they wish to debate this the time is after question time.

Senator FISHER (South Australia) (14:41): Mr President, I ask a further supplementary question. Given that the ACTU's Jeff Lawrence says that the specialist Australian Building and Construction Commission should be abolished because 'the ultimate goal must be one set of laws for all workers, regardless of the industry they work in', has the govern­ment asked its ACTU masters to justify how to now create a specialist tribunal and special laws for the truck industry?

Senator CARR (Victoria—Minister for Manufacturing and Minister for Defence Materiel) (14:42): Senator Fisher, you should have sent that question back. I know how hard it is to re-establish your position in this parliament, but you ought to send that sort of rubbish back. You ought to send it back—

Senator Brandis: Mr President, a point of order on relevance: as you are aware, the minister is required to be directly relevant: That requirement applies to the whole of the answer, not just parts of it. Nothing the minister has said so far has been anything other than abuse of Senator Fisher. You ought to have pulled him up before now. Nothing he has said has been within the standing order.

Senator Chris Evans: Mr President, on the point of order: Senator Fisher's second supplementary question could, I suspect, have been ruled out of order because she moved to a different subject matter, but Senator Carr, being the obliging chap he is, is attempting to give her an answer and respond to that question. He is very much on the question and I suggest to you that there is no point of order.

The PRESIDENT: Senator Carr, you have 43 seconds remaining. I draw your attention to the question.

Senator CARR: Perhaps I should reiterate. The government's position is that we want to provide opportunities for truck drivers to be paid reasonable rates so that they can get on with doing their jobs, and to get rid of any economic incentives for them to take unacceptable risks that endanger not just their lives but also other people's lives. It is unacceptable for this parliament to ignore its own responsibilities in this regard, and the government is taking steps to improve road safety. You would have thought those opposite would applaud us rather than seek to undermine what is an appropriate and, I think, long overdue reform.