7.1
Human error frequently plays a key role in fatal and serious injury crashes on the Australian road network. For example, research by the Victorian Transport Accident Commission (TAC) found that 71 per cent of road deaths in 2020 involved a ‘basic’ error. Errors of this kind may be associated with mental state (for example, anger or stress), inattention, and inexperience.
7.2
International studies have also found that in the first three years of driving, human error is a causal factor in up to 95 per cent of crashes. This is broadly confirmed by Australian research indicating that people are significantly more likely to be involved in a fatal crash in the first three years of driving—often while a provisional licence. This is reflected in Figure 7.1 below.
7.3
Education and training are often thought of as solutions to the issue of fatal and serious injury crashes linked to human error, and road safety strategies in most countries include education as one of their key pillars. In Australia, education falls under the heading of ‘safe people’:
[E]ncourage safe, consistent…compliant behaviour through well-informed and educated road users. Licensing, education, road rules, enforcement and sanctions are all part of the Safe System.
7.4
Training and education for drivers generally falls into one of two categories: pre-licence education and post-licence education. Pre-licence education is typically either school-based education or one-to-one professional driving instruction. Post-licence training often takes the form of single courses that aim to improve skills—including by teaching advanced driving techniques and strategies to respond to crash risks.
7.5
Despite enthusiasm for training and education as a means of reducing road trauma, the effectiveness of such measures is uncertain. For example, in one review of the ‘vast amount of literature’ on the effects of driver education, no evidence was found that education is an effective way of reducing road trauma. However, the study acknowledged that this result may be due to ineffective teaching methods, noting that it may be necessary to change the method or content of education to deliver improvements in road safety.
7.6
This chapter focuses on pre- and post- licence driver education and training, but also covers licensing restrictions, ongoing fitness to drive, and public awareness. It concludes with the committee’s views and recommendations.
School-based education
7.7
Road safety education in schools aims to equip children and young people with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes to enable safe road use in and around different traffic environments. Road safety education strategies in multiple jurisdictions recognise that road trauma does not discriminate by age, and that opportunities to enhance safety begin in the early years of school (if not before) and continue throughout a person’s driving career.
7.8
Several participants called for a focus on road safety in schools, noting that:
It is important that young people have safety ingrained in their thinking before they reach the age at which they can obtain a licence.
The school system remains the most effective means of educating young people on road safety.
Classroom settings are often the most effective way of achieving market capture, given the range of media platforms available to young people.
7.9
The National Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation (NACCHO) indicated that school-based education should start as early as possible and should be designed so that students can transition from school-based education to pre-licence training through to post-licence education. As appropriate, education in schools should also mirror community-based road safety campaigns.
7.10
Road Safety Education Limited (RSE) indicated that the following teaching methods have proven effective in instilling safe behaviours and attitudes in younger people:
Small group settings catering for individual learning needs.
Age-appropriate, relevant, and appropriately challenging content.
Targeting risk-taking behaviour.
Supporting the curriculum, with the ability to co-design resources.
Delivery over a longer period of time.
7.11
RSE also noted that the following methods have proven ineffective and, in some cases, have the potential to cause harm:
‘Shock tactics’ with a focus on trauma and long-term consequences.
‘One size fit all’ approaches to teaching and learning.
One-off or one day events.
Presentations to larger groups of students, which do not permit each student to be heard.
A focus on vehicle handling skills
Promotion of early licensure.
7.12
RSE elaborated on concerns associated with using ‘shock tactics’ in safety education at one of the committee’s public hearings, stating that:
We tend [to]…protect ourselves from anything that frightens us and tell ourselves that we'll be okay and soothe ourselves out of a situation…[I]t has been found that…students will…reject the message as a way of protecting themselves against the fear of the message rather than take it in. They may also see themselves in a different light to what is being put in front of them.
7.13
RSE observed that what works is long-term, ongoing education embedded in the school curriculum and the broader community, and which involves students in a personal fashion. RSE also emphasised the value of teaching students to consider their personal risk profiles as drivers and road users.
7.14
Stakeholders also provided suggestions for the content and subject matter of school programs. For example, NACCHO stated:
[A] number of [our] affiliates talked about [Aboriginal Community-Controlled Organisations (ACCOs)] wanting to run through high schools…basic vehicle maintenance programs that are not only about safety in cars and restraints…but about: if I want to go on a long drive into town, before I go, these are the things I need to think about—check my water, check my oil, what have I got in the car if I break down? Affiliates are saying ACCOs are prepared to run some of those programs, and, in some cases, they do but they are not funded to do that in any kind of widespread way.
7.15
AusCycling called for greater support for school-based learn-to-ride programs, stating that:
Learning to ride a bike is…often the first experience children have of the road system, road rules and interacting with other traffic. A formal learn-to-ride program is an important step in setting up our children for a lifetime as safe road-users. We already take this approach with water safety…Road safety should be treated in the same manner.
7.16
Additionally, AusCycling called for support from the Commonwealth for these programs to be made nationally consistent, for example by:
Promoting the programs through the Department of Education, Skills and Employment.
Making seed funding available for schools.
Supporting communities and schools who want to build learn-to-ride facilities on school grounds or in local parks.
Existing school-based programs
7.17
Stakeholders provided examples of programs that have proven effective in teaching safe road use and called for additional funding for these programs.
7.18
The Australian Road Safety Foundation (ARSF) told the committee that its RoadSet program has been successful in improving road safety outcomes. The program is aimed at students in Years 9 and 10 and features 10 modules covering matters such as vulnerable road user safety, emerging issues such as e-scooters, and safe driving behaviours. According to the ARSF, the program:
…aim[s] to support the quality teaching and learning of road safety in schools and community education programs. The …program and its resources are provided free of charge to all schools nationally thanks to funding provided by the Australian Government.
7.19
The ARSF added that the program is designed to be as easy as possible for teachers to employ at their discretion—including by permitting teachers to encourage students to access the program online. This may be necessary in the later years of high school when curricula are compressed. There has also been significant interest in extending the program to primary schools.
7.20
The Australasian Fire and Emergency Service Authorities Council (AFESAC) highlighted the Queensland Fire and Emergency Services’ delivery of a Road Attitudes and Action Planning (RAAP) program to Year 11 and 12 students. The program is designed as a preventative strategy that provides information to younger people on road safety to enable more informed decisions and to mitigate risks. It is presented in mainstream and non-traditional schools, restorative justice programs and community youth organisations by operational firefighters.
7.21
BRAKE highlighted its own program as an example of a successful school-based education initiative. The program is aimed at students aged 15 to 17 and is delivered in schools by existing teachers. BRAKE personnel train teachers in program delivery and provide guidance on lesson plans, outcomes, objectives, and explanatory material.
7.22
The program comprises eight modules including PowerPoint presentations and interactive activities. While schools are free to choose the speed at which the course is delivered, research shows that delivery over a longer period is more beneficial for information retention. A key aim of the program is reinforcing to students that they are at risk while driving, which is crucial given the prevalence of risk-taking behaviours among younger and early-career drivers.
Embedding road safety education in the school curriculum
7.23
Stakeholders noted that while school-based safety programs have been effective, there is inconsistency across schools and jurisdictions as to how and when programs are delivered and as to the outcomes the programs seek to achieve. Stakeholders indicated that a nationally consistent approach to road safety education in schools should be considered—using existing programs and guidelines as models.
7.24
RSE told the committee that while some jurisdictions have integrated road safety programs such as RYDA (the RSE’s youth driver awareness program) into the curriculum, others are yet to embed structured road safety learning. RSE also noted that there is inconsistency in how and where road safety is taught, stating that:
Sometimes [schools] deal with [road safety] as a life topic, but in other cases it's about getting it through as an authentic context to learning in other topics. For example, if you're going to teach maths and physics, why not teach it against the backdrop of a speeding car and braking? It's about including [road safety] in all curriculum topics in an authentic way for learning.
7.25
Road Safety Matters (RSM) expressed support for integration of road safety into the curriculum. RSM indicated that road safety education could begin as early as eight to 12 years (focusing on road use as a pedestrian or cyclist), emphasising that education must be age-appropriate and as enjoyable and engaging as possible to facilitate retention.
7.26
Some stakeholders called for measures to standardise and mandate safety education across the school curriculum. For example, Maurice Blackburn Lawyers (MBL) urged the committee to consider how federal oversight could be used to ensure that road safety programs become a mandatory part of the school curriculum. It proposed that the committee encourage state education ministers to adopt standards for school-based road safety education—for example via the agenda for the national Education Ministers Meeting. According to MBL, such standards could include:
Development and use of technologies (including simulation) to assist young people to understand the causes and impacts of driver distraction.
The impact of alcohol and drug use on driving.
Awareness of other road users such as pedestrians and bicycles.
7.27
The Office of Road Safety (ORS) stated that education of younger people is a key priority (although education is ultimately the responsibility of the states). According to the ORS, there are a ‘huge number’ of programs across jurisdictions, starting in kindergarten and continuing through to the pre-learner stage. Some programs are funded by the federal government, and some (such as RoadSet) have been identified as suitable for national rollout. The ORS also noted that there are several cyclist programs across the states and territories. Some have a bicycle maintenance component. Some also involve parents—creating a framework that facilitates conversations about road safety and furthers the young person’s development as a road user.
Educating parents and guardians
7.28
Some stakeholders observed that teaching road safety to younger people must involve parents and guardians, noting that parents and guardians are responsible for modelling safe road use and for explaining and reinforcing safety lessons. Moreover, parents and guardians are often responsible for supervising children while they accumulate required practice hours as a precondition to obtaining a provisional licence.
7.29
BRAKE observed that it can be more difficult to inculcate safe driving behaviours (including safe methods of supervision) in parents and carers than younger people. When seminars or information sessions are offered to parents, attendance rates are low (around 10 to 15 per cent). Fathers and other male guardians also have ingrained (often incorrect) ideas about how road safety should be taught and can be unreceptive to new ideas.
7.30
BRAKE stated that an effective way of engaging with parents on road safety is via ‘snippets’ of information that can be reviewed at any time. Accordingly, BRAKE’s courses provide parents with a quick response (QR) code that can be used to access information on the BRAKE website.
7.31
Additionally, BRAKE identified a need to ensure that parents are encouraging their children to undertake as much supervised practice as possible while still a learner driver. BRAKE also stressed that parents should allow children to use the best available vehicle—given some parents take the view that young people should drive the older of the family’s cars due to higher crash risk, notwithstanding that a newer vehicle is the safer choice.
Pre-licence training and licence requirements
7.32
Stakeholders observed that professional supervision at the pre-licence stage (while a person is a learner driver), as well as robust licensing requirements, (including restrictions) are critical to road safety outcomes. Stakeholders raised concerns that current arrangements may not align with global best practice, and highlighted areas in which the licensing framework could be enhanced.
7.33
RSM indicated that requirements for professional supervision and competency-based testing may be insufficient in Australia—particularly when compared with other jurisdictions. In Australia, learner drivers are only required to complete a multiple-choice test before being taken as competent to drive (at least, when accompanied by a person over the age of 21 who holds a full licence). The accompanying person is not required to hold specific qualifications and has no overriding control of the vehicle. The learner must then complete around 120 hours of practice and pass a test (or a series of competencies assessed by an instructor) to qualify for a provisional licence. By contrast:
In Sweden, learner driver must complete eight theoretical tests (including on drugs, alcohol, and safe driving) and 14 driving tests prior to a final test. These are followed by hazard education, which includes skid control and emergency braking. Further, prior to on-road instruction, an instructor and their student must complete a three-hour traffic safety course together.
In the Netherlands, a new driver must complete a theory test then enrol with a driving school to use a school vehicle for a practical test. There are no minimum time allocations or hours of training, but the average learner completes around 35 lessons with a registered driving instructor prior to applying for a driving licence test.
7.34
BRAKE similarly told the committee that learner drivers would benefit from increased practice hours before being permitted to transition to a provisional licence. Accordingly, BRAKE continued, education programs should not promote early licensure (for example under an incentives-based model).
7.35
The Riders Action Group Western Australia (RAGWA) also viewed licensing in Australia as lagging behind international best practice. In relation to licensing arrangements in Western Australia (WA), it stated:
[Obtaining a licence] amounts to a 50-hour supervision logbook with mum and dad, five hours of which is driving at night-time…[T]here's no additional training. In Sweden, to get a learner's permit, you need to demonstrate that you can control the vehicle first, and then there are three different stages of licencing to get your driver's licence. Then you still need a separate qualification to be able to tow a trailer. In [WA], we answer 38-odd questions, get a learner's permit, go out on the road, do a test learning how to parallel park. Then they give you a licence, and off you go. It's not actually adopting those principles.
7.36
Regarding professional instruction, RSM told the committee that in many cases a learner undertakes just six to seven of their 120 hours of driving practice with an accredited instructor. This figure is reduced further in regional, rural, and remote areas. While acknowledging that it is often cost-prohibitive for a learner to purchase lessons with an instructor, RSM felt that steps must be taken to ensure that learners receive high-quality supervision. For example, training could be delivered to parents and other ‘lay supervisors’, to ensure they do not pass on poor driving habits.
7.37
RSM also expressed some reservations about the quality of professional driving instructors, as well as their motivations, stating that:
[D]riving instructors require a Certificate III or IV in Training and Assessment to become a driving instructor, however this does not necessarily qualify them as a ‘good driver’. The industry requires more regulation and testing to instructors to improve the quality, results, and perception of the ‘service’.
Licence restrictions
7.38
Some inquiry submitters noted that restrictions imposed on learner and provisional drivers could be strengthened to improve safety outcomes.
7.39
For example, the Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety Queensland (CARRS-Q) called for the following restrictions to be imposed on provisional licences in all jurisdictions, noting that these have been shown to be the most effective restrictions in reducing fatal and serious injury crashes:
Late night driving restrictions for at least six months.
Only a single peer-aged passenger permitted for at least six months.
7.40
The Police Federation of Australia (PFA) also supported the imposition of additional restrictions on learner and provisional drivers, particularly if the driver is younger. Examples of restrictions suggested by the PFA include:
Limits on engine power for learner and provisional drivers, as well as on speeds a learner or provisional driver may travel.
Restrictions on the passengers a learner or provisional driver may carry.
Zero Blood Alcohol Concentration (BAC) limits for all learner and provisional drivers.
Standard penalties for breaches of road rules for learner and provisional drivers, including speed and alcohol limiters.
7.41
Additionally, PFA called for advanced driving training to be made part of all licensing arrangements. While simulation-based training is useful to prepare new drivers to respond appropriately in emergency situations, there is still ‘nothing more valuable’ than physically experiencing situations such as skidding, hard braking, and driving in adverse weather conditions. PFA also indicated that relaxed restrictions could be considered for younger drivers who have undertaken advanced driver training.
7.42
The Human Factors and Ergonomic Society of Australia (HFESA) noted that existing licensing arrangements focus on placing restrictions on newly licenced drivers rather than on training and skills development. This approach assumes that a driver acquires all necessary skills while holding a learner or provisional licence and that vehicle safety features are sufficient to compensate for poor driving ability. In HFESA’s view, the lack of focus on skills is particularly concerning for drivers responding to loss-of-control situations. The HFESA provided the following illustrative example:
I've got a colleague who [owns]…a brand-new BMW with every system under the sun in it…[including] radar crash avoidance. He was going down the Western Highway and did two 360-degree spins after he aquaplaned in heavy rain. He felt absolutely useless and helpless. He hadn't been trained in how to work with the system and he didn't understand the system. He was told after the fact that what you're supposed to do in that situation is take your hands off the steering wheel and your feet off the pedals. He didn't understand that. He hadn't been trained, and the technology was perhaps too smart for him.
7.43
The HFESA President, Mr Wes Wilkinson, also spoke to a personal experience in which poorly planned resurfacing work led to control systems in his vehicle ‘locking up’, almost resulting in a collision in oncoming traffic. Mr Wilkinson noted that while he was able to avoid a crash, this was largely due to his experience as a rally driver.
Post-licence education
7.44
Some stakeholders identified the need for additional driver education past provisional licensing to ensure that safe habits are reinforced throughout a person’s driving career. One submitter noted that industries such as air and rail require ongoing training and periodic review to ensure skills do not deteriorate. The submitter stated that there is ‘no basis’ to treat driving differently and called for routine testing for all drivers under supervised conditions throughout the course of a driver’s career.
7.45
Stakeholders told the committee that support for older drivers should be a core part of ongoing training and education, with representatives of the Transurban Road Safety Centre at Neuroscience Research Australia (NeuRA) highlighting that the population is ageing and an increasing number of older people are choosing to remain on the road. Supporting older drivers to remain on the road—so long as this is safe—was noted as important to ensuring their social and economic participation.
7.46
Studies conducted by the World Bank indicate that although there are often demands to build on skills obtained at the pre-licence stage via post-licence education and training, post-licence education has not been found to result in improvements to safety, and indeed has been correlated with increases in road crashes. Generally, this is explained by participants in post-licence training courses being over-confident in their driving abilities.
Training and licensing for specific groups of road users
7.47
The committee received evidence on driver training and licensing for various groups of road users, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, motorcyclists, and new migrants and international visa holders. This evidence is discussed below.
7.48
Training and licensing for heavy vehicles is discussed in Chapter 9, along with other measures to improve safety for the heavy vehicle sector.
Support for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities
7.49
Several stakeholders called for additional support for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, with a focus on culturally appropriate training and licensing arrangements underpinned by sustainable funding.
7.50
For example, NACCHO noted that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples—particularly in rural and remote areas—face systemic barriers to licensure. According to NACCHO, integrated, multifaceted programs are required to address such issues, including provision of support to obtain identity documents and measures to defray the cost of obtaining a licence. NACCHO indicated that these measures should be supported by other changes to the road safety framework, including:
School-based education targeting younger drivers.
Free driver education courses.
Changes to licensing arrangements to improve cultural safety, including considering whether testing arrangements are culturally appropriate in terms of form, language, and location.
7.51
NACCHO also stated that programs to support Aboriginal and Torres Islander peoples should be nationally coordinated, and be co-designed with—and where possible delivered by—Aboriginal Community-Controlled Health Organisations (ACCHO)s to ensure programs take a person-centred approach and consider social determinants of health. NACCHO noted that there are a range of programs which target Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities that may be used as a model for future initiatives and may merit additional funding to ensure ongoing sustainability. Community-driven analysis of these programs may also help evaluate their capacity to improve road safety.
7.52
CARRS-Q similarly observed that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples often experience challenges obtaining driver licences—particularly due to a lack of access to affordable, culturally safe services. Other issues include lack of access to identity papers; social welfare conflict; language barriers; and levels of digital or financial literacy. CARRS-Q called for more investment in culturally safe licensing support services for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, including to ensure that higher numbers of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are employed in leadership positions and in roles involving direct contact with prospective licensees.
7.53
Dr Adam Heaton also called for investment in culturally safe driver education, training, and testing for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples plus investment in road safety training for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, with a focus on vehicle maintenance and use of child safety restraints.
Training and licensing for motorcyclists
7.54
Stakeholders indicated that changes to training and licensing requirements for motorcyclists (particularly for learner riders) may substantially improve road safety outcomes.
7.55
The Australian Road Research Board (ARRB) proposed the following restrictions to address risks associated with inexperience and rider error:
Removing direct access to motorcycle licences by requiring at least one year’s car licence tenure as a pre-requisite.
Extending minimum motorcycle learner permit tenure to six months.
Removing age-based concessions for licence applicants and requiring all novices to complete licensing requirements regardless of age.
Removing concessions for rider training and supervision programs.
Removing the right to operate a moped on a car licence and introducing knowledge and skill testing requirements for moped licences.
7.56
ARRB also recommended that consideration be given to restricting engine capacity to 125cc and power output to 9kW for learner riders and requiring learners to operate motorcycles with an anti-lock braking system (ABS).
7.57
CARRS-Q proposed that the following controls be implemented consistently across Australia:
Setting the age for obtaining a motorcycle learner permit no younger than the age required to obtain a provisional car licence.
Restrictions on riding late at night.
7.58
Some stakeholders (largely motorcycle peak and representative bodies) expressed reservations about certain limitations on learner and provisional licences. For example, while supporting additional training focused on risk and hazard perception, the Australian Motorcycle Council (AMC) argued against increasing age requirements or for motorcycle licences or requiring a person to hold a car licence to obtain a motorcycle learner permit. According to AMC, such measures do not aim to increase safety but to discourage young people to take up powered two-wheelers as a transport choice. AMC also told the committee that:
[S]ome people trying to develop a road safety strategy…[have the] idea that improving road safety overall will be assisted if you can discourage people from riding motorcycles. [However, the relevant measures] …haven't discouraged people from riding motorcycles; the number of motorcycles continues to grow. [Moreover]…even if you do discourage people from riding…you haven't done anything concrete about improving the safety of those who still ride.
7.59
The Motorcycle Council of New South Wales (MC NSW) emphasised that more should be done regarding post-licence training for motorcyclists, with a focus on training over a rider’s career. MC NSW added that the transition from pre- to post-licence training must also be properly managed, drawing attention to arrangements in New Zealand as an example of good practice:
New Zealand's novice rider training scheme has several courses available depending on the rider's level of experience: gold, silver, and bronze. The gold course is designed for those who have already obtained their licence, and as such it provides a natural progression to post-licence rider training, a progression that is sadly lacking in Australia, where [after] the compulsory provisional learner course, there is no natural progression to post-licence training.
7.60
MC NSW further indicated that the way post-licence courses are promoted (often called ‘master’s course[s]’ in recognition of participants’ experience) encourages uptake, as does the fact that the courses aim to be enjoyable. In addition, MC NSW said there would be merit in offering post-licence training at reduced cost or providing incentives such as reductions in insurance premiums.
Training and support for new migrants and international visa holders
7.61
Some stakeholders indicated that additional support is needed to promote road safety for new entrants to Australia, noting that the Australian road system differs in several important ways from other jurisdictions.
7.62
For example, RSM expressed concern that many people who come to Australia—either as tourists, temporary visitors such as students, or permanent residents—experience difficulties adapting to driving on the road network and accordingly drive in a higher-risk manner. RSM suggested addressing this by teaching road safety in ‘on-boarding’ programs for new migrants, as well as by giving more scrutiny to processes by which holders of international licences can obtain an Australian licence.
7.63
MC NSW noted that some jurisdictions permit international students to ride on the licence of their home country indefinitely, while permanent residents must convert to a local licence. This means some international students may be riding on their country-of-origin licence for years without undertaking training either in that country or in Australia. MC NSW stated that all riders should undergo novice rider training and testing as soon as practicable before being able to ride in Australia.
Consistency in licensing arrangements
7.64
Several inquiry participants expressed concern at the lack of consistency in licensing requirements across jurisdictions, noting that inconsistency has adverse impacts on road users and other road safety stakeholders.
7.65
RSE highlighted a lack of consistency in training and licensing requirements—including restrictions on learner and provisional licences—as creating challenges for road safety education bodies. Often, this is because such bodies must be familiar with a substantial number of laws and policies which apply in different jurisdictions and must remain up to date on changes to ensure students receive the correct information. This can be resource- and time-intensive. RSE also noted the effects on drivers needing to travel for school, education, or other purposes, stating that:
The issue is where you have…a student living in northern [NSW] and popping across the Queensland border every day to go to school and…has to deal with different sets of rules. It's something that would…benefit from continuity right throughout Australia.
7.66
Accordingly, RSE supported the development of a national approach to licensing and to road safety education.
7.67
Similarly, PFA viewed harmonised licence requirements and restrictions as crucial to improving road safety for younger drivers:
Some states [set] speed limits [according to] progression …in logbooks and some states have one set speed limit all the way through…[T]here are restrictions on the number of passengers. All states have the zero blood alcohol limits for L-platers, and for P-platers some have 0.02, which is …just for medication. Minimum hours of training from a qualified training instructor change from state to state, as do the penalties…
This is where federal harmonization could be …critically important. …[W]hether you're driving in New South Wales or Queensland, the rules should be maintained the same, because it's about education and keeping young people and all the other road users safe.
7.68
Austroads, meanwhile, indicated consistency might be achieved through greater collaboration between jurisdictions, including via the involvement of road safety organisations such as itself:
One example of where we've seen some success in implementation is in Tasmania, where they're in the process of implementing a graduated licensing system. They were able to do this with the support of an Austroads publication. Austroads was able to look at the earlier work done by the bigger jurisdictions of Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland and really identify from there what was the best, through a big piece of work. That then made the role of the smaller or following jurisdictions a lot easier.
7.69
ORS acknowledged the ‘huge appetite’ for consistency in training and licensing arrangements across jurisdictions. However, it also recognised that jurisdictions start from different points in terms of licensing frameworks, often underpinned by specific policy issues (for example, jurisdictions with limited public transport sometimes set a lower age limit for licences). In this respect, ORS stressed the importance of changes to licensing arrangements taking account of these issues to avoid imposing undue restrictions on road users. It may also take significant time for changes to licensing arrangements to pass state Parliaments.
Focus areas for driver education
7.70
Several stakeholders highlighted specific areas which should be targeted in pre- and post-licence education to enhance the contribution of training and education to road safety. Key areas included sharing the road safely with heavy vehicles and vulnerable road users; ‘higher order’ skills such as risk management and hazard perception; and driving in regional, rural, and remote areas. Some stakeholders also highlighted the value of simulation and game-based training to enhancing road safety.
Sharing the road safely with other road users
7.71
A particular focus was ensuring that roads can be safely shared between heavy vehicles and other road users. In this respect, the Toll Group noted a lack of understanding among light vehicle drivers as to truck stopping distance, and suggested there was insufficient attention paid to heavy vehicles in pre-licence training:
[T]he NSW driver knowledge test contains 364 potential questions for novice drivers. Of these, only one asks a question about light and heavy vehicle interaction while only two questions relate to traffic signs featuring trucks.
7.72
Accordingly, the Toll Group recommended that novice driver tests and state and national road safety strategies give greater priority to educating light vehicle drivers on how to drive safely around heavy vehicles. The Toll Group added that there may also be merit in government agencies making driver training—including heavy vehicle awareness training—part of training and development for their staff.
7.73
Similarly, the Australian Trucking Association (ATA) and National Road Transport Association (NatRoads) said that federal, state and territory governments must ensure sharing the road safely with heavy vehicles is comprehensively addressed via community and driver education. The ATA and NatRoads drew attention to their SafeT360 program in this regard:
[SafeT360] is backed by research and puts young road users in the driver's seat to experience real-life road events through immersive virtual reality technology. Installation of real truck seats within the exhibition support the hands-on learning experience. This provides the hands-on experience and knowledge that is not offered by learner driver programs.
7.74
The National Heavy Vehicle Regulator (NHVR) emphasised that improving road users' understanding of driving around heavy vehicles will require the development and promotion of safety awareness initiatives, highlighting the ‘We Need Space’ program as an example of a campaign to improve road user awareness of heavy vehicles’ blind spots, stopping distances, and limited manoeuvrability. The NHVR told the committee that:
The messages are simple but effective. Trucks take longer to brake. Don't stop quickly in front of them. A 60- or 70-tonne vehicle needs to have space. Trucks have large blind spots. Make sure they can see you. Trucks need room to move, so avoid risky behaviour like cutting in when they are turning…We have received extremely positive feedback [on] the We Need Space campaign to date. Importantly, truck drivers…have thanked us for considering their needs as they perform their critical job across the country.
7.75
Ensuring drivers behave safely around vulnerable road users was also identified as critical to improved safety outcomes.
7.76
For example, RAGWA stated that more must be done to increase awareness of motorcyclists:
Unlike passenger vehicles, motorcycle safety cannot be improved by mandating better crash performance or installing airbags. Motorcyclists rely on their heightened perception of traffic around them but need the assistance of other road users, just like cyclists and pedestrians do.
7.77
The Amy Gillett Foundation (AGF) indicated that steps should be taken to enhance drivers’ ability to understand the needs of, and to share the road safely with, cyclists. The AGF stated that it has had success in this area through its Sharing the Road Safely program, which provides drivers with first-hand experience of challenges faced by vulnerable road users:
As a result of training completed so far in Melbourne, over 90 per cent of respondents have said they have a better understanding of issues faced by [vulnerable road users] and over 80 per cent will change their behaviour around [this cohort]. Notably, the program is rooted in the Safe System approach and the principle that 'people make mistakes but those mistakes should not result in death or serious injury'.
7.78
Stakeholders also indicated that there is a need to educate vulnerable road users and others on the steps they can take to ensure their own safety on the road. For example, the AGF noted that there is a clear need to educate cyclists—particularly young cyclists and those who are new to the roads—on key safety measures such as installing lights and reflectors and wearing high-visibility clothing.
7.79
The Caravan Industry Association of Australia (CIAA) noted that there have been a substantial number of new entrants to the caravanning and recreational vehicle (RV) sector. The CIIA expressed concern that less than 10 per cent of RV purchasers undertake towing courses, adding that incentives are needed to encourage training in this area.
Risk management and hazard awareness
7.80
Some stakeholders called for changes to road safety education to increase the focus on personal risk management and other ‘higher order’ skills such as hazard perception.
7.81
For example, CARRS-Q told the committee that safety education for young people must provide them the tools and strategies to identify the behaviours, triggers, and risks that will impact them as individuals:
[W]e teach [young people] to pass tests to say that, yes, they know the speed limits; they can drive and keep to the speed limits. But is that really what they're going to do when they get their licence. They want to fit in with other people. If they've got other people in the car, they're more likely to speed. They need to reflect on that. [Young people are] very capable of learning, but they need to think through strategies and be prompted to think about themselves, not just hear general messages but apply them.
7.82
CARRS-Q also noted that there would be value in focusing road safety education on empowering young people to make safer choices about road use. Such choices may include avoiding driving at certain times, better route planning, and stopping to rest or reducing speeds if signs of fatigue are identified.
7.83
CARRS-Q’s evidence is broadly supported by research conducted by the World Bank which indicates that road safety education—particularly in schools—correlates with small but important increases in the proportion of teenagers involved in road crashes. These increases in road crashes may be explained by increases in driver over-confidence or by allowing driving at an earlier age. This suggests that although school-based education has not led to meaningful reduction in road trauma, there may be a need to change content or delivery methods of programs to make them more effective rather than abandoning road safety education in schools altogether.
7.84
Stakeholders noted that pre-licence training and education has (at least in some jurisdictions) begun to focus on risks and attitudes as well as on road rules and operational competency, and that this trend should continue.
7.85
For example, the Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads (DTMR) stated:
We led the country [in] introducing PrepL as part of the graduated licensing system...PrepL is…an online learning and assessment program that shifts the focus of new driver education to behaviour and attitudes rather than road rules testing.
Driving in regional, rural, and remote areas
7.86
Some stakeholders indicated that more should be done to educate road users on the unique challenges of driving on regional, rural, and remote roads, and particularly in relation to driving in remote and very remote areas.
7.87
For example, the National Rural Health Alliance (NRHA) stated that:
To complement the mechanical education drivers receive across the country, it is important that they receive adequate training on how to drive safely and appropriately to conditions on rural roads, including poor lighting, wildlife, winding roads, narrow lane shoulders and other characteristics. A safe driver…should identify unsafe conditions and take action to ensure appropriate speeds and vehicle positioning on the road.
7.88
Accordingly, NRHA recommended that safety programs for younger drivers be trialled in rural areas to address the heightened crash risk.
Simulation-based training and education
7.89
Some inquiry participants called for the use of simulation and game-based teaching methods in driver education—including in schools—as part of the process to obtain a licence, and throughout a person’s driving life. Stakeholders emphasised that driving simulations can assist new drivers to prepare for situations that cannot be captured by theory-based methods, and for which practical training may not be safe.
7.90
RSM told the committee that game-based training may be very suitable for new and learner drivers and for schools—particularly where cost and other factors limit access to ‘real time’ practice. Other applications include:
New migrants needing to obtain an Australian licence.
Supporting people with disability.
Elderly drivers—including to enable regular self-assessment.
People in regional, rural, or remote communities without access to professional driver education.
Rehabilitation for people involved in a road crash.
7.91
RSM added that simulation-based training may—at least for learners—be more effective in teaching driver competencies than ‘real-time’ training. This is because simulations remove anxieties associated with driving a physical vehicle and allow users to focus on matters such as pedal and blinker use or destination planning. Ideally, competencies will be ‘second nature’ when a student begins to drive an actual vehicle. RSM also noted that simulation-based training is an effective means of combatting driver distraction, fatigue, and drug and alcohol use, by exposing students to the effect of such behaviours in a controlled environment:
[W]e can put in eye-tracking technology, so we can check when [the user is] texting and…make them crash every time…so that they can see cause and effect…We can do fatigue. We can black the screen down so it's like they're falling asleep. Impairment, drugs, or alcohol: we can distort visions on the screen. We can tweak response times. We can do all those things for all those students who are about to get on the road solo.
7.92
To illustrate the value of simulation-based training, RSM drew attention to a study comparing RSM’s game-based program (myDRIVESCHOOL) to a government-funded in-car lesson. According to RSM, students who completed the simulation prior to undertaking an in-car lesson rated themselves 48 per cent more competent and 17 per cent less anxious.
7.93
The ARSF also expressed support for the use of driver simulations, not only for training but also to assess individual driver performance. Data generated through simulation-based assessments might also be used to support enhanced driver education programs.
Ongoing fitness to drive
7.94
Some inquiry participants identified a need to improve current processes to identify and assess the competency of drivers and—if necessary—take steps to ensure that an unfit driver does not continue to operate a vehicle.
7.95
Occupational Therapy Australia (OTA) observed that there are a variety of factors which impact on fitness to drive—including age, disability, and medical conditions—and asserted that it is crucial to have measures in place to identify potentially unsafe drivers in a consistent, systematic way. Such measures should not place arbitrary restrictions on driving (based on age or the mere fact of having an impairment) but should facilitate identification and assessment on a case-by-case basis.
7.96
According to OTA, jurisdictions often rely on general practitioners (GPs) to identify and report relevant conditions to licensing authorities, which are empowered to conduct assessments of ongoing fitness. However, GPs may not be ideally placed to undertake this role. This is because the role is not part of the GP’s core business, and because many GPs may be reluctant to jeopardise their relationship with a patient by taking actions leading to the patient being deemed unfit to drive. Additionally, licensing authorities may not be the most appropriate entities to assess the impact of physical or cognitive decline, as their core business is assessing general driving ability.
7.97
OTA recommended that GPs refer patients to occupational therapy driving assessors (OTDAs) if there are concerns about driving ability, stating that:
OTDAs provide a unique combination of on- and off-road testing, emphasising both safety and wellbeing, [and] perform both clinic-based…and on-road assessments. This comprehensive approach ensures an individual’s licence is not revoked solely on the grounds of a new medical condition…[and] is considered the gold standard internationally.
7.98
OTA also told the committee that there is not a nationally consistent model for identifying people who may be at risk, and called for the development of nationally consistent guidelines for the identification and assessment of potentially unfit drivers. OTA proposed that this be based on the existing Victorian model (which is considered the ‘gold standard’).
7.99
Recognising the importance of driving as a means of social and economic participation, OTA also noted that strategies may be available to help a person drive for longer while still maximising road safety:
Our first port of call is…[to] look at people's practices of when and where they're driving and at what times of day, avoiding night and dusk driving times. We really make sure that people have the best vision that they're capable of and that they're otherwise healthy and really in the best state to drive. Even simple things such as looking at and adapting the vehicles people are driving can enable them to drive safer for longer.
Access to occupational therapy driver assessments
7.100
While expressing strong support for driver assessments by OTDAs, OTA acknowledged that these assessments may be cost-prohibitive. Moreover, while costs can sometimes be reimbursed or offset via government schemes (for example, Medicare or the National Disability Insurance Scheme), access to these schemes is limited and payments may not be sufficient to cover the cost of a driving assessment. In addition, public medical services (which offer fully subsidised assessments) are often unable to meet demand.
7.101
Accordingly, OTA recommended that the Commonwealth create a fully subsidised program for OTDA driver assessments to assist those who are not eligible for support under existing programs—noting that access to driver assessments is affected by the limited numbers of OTDAs across Australia (particularly in rural and remote areas).
Community education and awareness
7.102
Stakeholders called for effective, targeted advertising and media campaigns to increase awareness of road trauma, drive cultural change and encourage safe behaviours, noting that these campaigns often reach a wider audience than education delivered via schools or licensing programs. Stakeholders also indicated that campaigns should be part of an ‘all-inclusive’ approach to road safety and should support other measures such as change to speed limits, infrastructure upgrades, and enforcement activity.
Delivery and evaluation
7.103
Inquiry participants provided views on how road safety campaigns should be delivered to maximise their impact. For example, Road Trauma Support Services Victoria (RTSSV) told the committee that campaigns should amplify the voices of people who have been involved in a road crash or have otherwise been impacted by road trauma. The RTSSV drew attention to its own campaign (‘You’ve got precious cargo in your car. Look after it’) to illustrate the value of personal stories and experiences.
7.104
HFESA noted that while many campaigns use broad messaging, it would be more useful to target specific road safety issues such as safe merging and overtaking. Campaigns on the dangers of assistive technologies are also increasingly important as new safety technologies are introduced.
7.105
DTMR highlighted that the state’s Community Road Safety Grants scheme provides $4 million per year for grassroots education projects. Queensland has also spent more than $7 million on the ‘StreetSmarts’ initiative, which delivers campaigns focused on issues such as drink driving; holidays and road trips; regional roads; speeding; seat belts; tailgating and dangerous behaviours; distraction; and sharing roads with vulnerable road users.
7.106
Representatives of the Transurban Road Safety Centre, NeuRA, emphasised that awareness and education campaigns must be based on credible evidence and evaluated to determine effectiveness. The most effective campaigns can be rolled out at a national level. However, Transurban told the committee, this is not occurring in the current road safety environment:
[W]e need to evaluate [campaigns] in terms of hard outcomes—not just whether somebody saw an ad but whether [the campaign] actually changed behaviour. And that requires research. It requires researchers with the observational and data skills to do that. When these campaigns are funded, that level of evaluation is not built into the funding for the program, so those evaluations don't get done.
7.107
Other academic research recognises the importance of properly evaluating the effectiveness of public campaigns and expresses concern at the paucity of information on formal evaluation.
Public campaigns accompanying other road safety measures
7.108
Some stakeholders indicated that public campaigns are most effective when they accompany other safety measures. For example, representatives of the Transurban Road Safety Centre, NeuRA, noted that public campaigns have the greatest impact when they complement new enforcement approaches or changes to law or policy. Additionally, Transurban told the committee that campaigns should be co-designed by or at least designed in close consultation with communities:
We need to have the communities drive the campaigns rather than the experts decide what the community needs to know. Also, we need a system that supports what we are doing in trying to change people's perceptions. If we are saying to people that speed kills and speed matters but we then still allow them to drive at 100 kilometres an hour on a dirt country road, it's a mixed message. We need the enforcement and the campaign to sit nicely together.
7.109
Roads Australia (RA) noted that while states have implemented several measures to combat speeding and mobile phone use, these are not accompanied by campaigns to encourage the public to see the proscribed behaviour as socially unacceptable. According to RA, this may be where some ‘plateauing’ has occurred regarding acceptance of deaths and serious injuries on Australian roads.
7.110
That public awareness campaigns are more effective when accompanying other road safety measures—and vice versa—is recognised in the academic research. One study concluded that campaigns have the greatest impact when accompanied by road safety education programs or increased penalties for breaches of road rules. It also noted that legislative and other safety measures are more effective if accompanied by campaigns.
Content and focus of road safety campaigns
7.111
Stakeholders provided a range of views on the content and focus of road safety education campaigns. In many cases, these mirrored views on focus areas for driver education and training more generally.
7.112
Transurban indicated that heavy vehicles should be a focus for community education, noting that heavy vehicles are over-represented in fatal and serious injury statistics. Transurban added that it has recently developed community messaging on safety around heavy vehicles, which it promotes in conjunction with state trucking associations through social media, direct customer communications and roadside billboards.
7.113
The NRHA called for campaigns which enhance awareness of the unique dangers associated with driving on regional, rural, and remote roads. Such campaigns have become increasingly necessary with greater use of remote roads during the COVID-19 pandemic.
7.114
OTA observed that there is a prevailing attitude that driving is a right rather than a privilege carrying numerous responsibilities, and that this leads to unsafe drivers remaining on the road. Accordingly, OTA proposed that the Commonwealth support campaigns to educate drivers on the need to assess driving ability at regular intervals and where there are concerns related to competency. Expanding on this theme, OTA told the committee that a campaign must build on measures to ensure potentially unsafe drivers can be referred for assessment:
[T]o have [a] campaign, we need to have in place a national system where there are independent facilities that GPs can refer clients on to…Once we have the centres established…[a] campaign…would enable people to know what to do and how to refer people to these independent facilities.
7.115
Some stakeholders indicated that there would be merit in community-based initiatives targeting specific road user groups. DTMR noted that in response to increases in motorcyclist fatal and serious injuries, Queensland has begun rolling out community-based motorcycle safety initiatives. This initially involved direct contact with riders across the state to remind them of the need to be safe while riding; refresh skills; and encourage riders to wear the safest possible gear. Work is also underway on longer-term research and engagement with the motorcycle community. According to DTMR:
This work has measured prevalent attitudes held by riders and identified significant differences in motivations, beliefs, and behaviours... [which have] been mapped to data on infringement, licensing, and registration, providing an understanding of the size of each…group [of motorcyclists] and the ability to assess…risk [and] determine engagement priorities.
7.116
Stakeholders also indicated that there may be merit in using campaigns to change perceptions of certain groups of road users, noting that this may be particularly relevant to gig economy participants such as delivery riders.
7.117
Uber expressed support for campaigns to improve sentiment towards cyclists, to ensure that road users such as passenger and heavy vehicles understand and demonstrate respect for these road vulnerable road users.
7.118
RAGWA noted that efforts to promote the social and health benefits of motorcycling via community initiatives have positive road safety benefits as well as benefits for tourism in rural local government areas. RAGWA also highlighted the current ‘disparity’ in public perceptions of cyclists and pedestrians relative to motorcyclists, noting speculating that this is explained by differences in the applicable advocacy bodies.
Campaigns targeting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
7.119
Some stakeholders called for campaigns to increase knowledge, awareness and understanding of road safety in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. Stakeholders indicated that these campaigns should be led by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, be culturally appropriate and targeted to individual communities and groups. Sustainable funding may also be required to ensure sufficient reach.
7.120
For example, NACCHO called for funding for ACCHOs to allow them to develop and deliver targeted, culturally appropriate safety campaigns. These should target people entering high school and focus on preventing road crashes (primary prevention). Given the diversity of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Communities and different road safety needs across regional and metropolitan areas, campaigns must be targeted to specific communities or locations. Drawing from examples of successful campaigns outside of road safety to illustrate this, NACCHO told the committee that:
In a couple of places…we would use 1.5 metres [as the safe physical distance]. But in some …posters and videos, people were using 1½ Woollies’ shopping trolleys or five AFL footballs, so people could understand. Some of them were doing it in their language…
[Organisations] in the Kimberley…involved a women's AFL team [in a campaign relating to syphilis], and they did this little YouTube video around it. It was engaging all the young women in the program to talk about safe sex, what you need to do, testing et cetera, and the little YouTube video that they developed was about using a condom for all sorts of purposes …After two years, we saw, in areas where people were not comfortable talking about testing and syphilis, in both men and women, they were openly talking about it. In Cairns, because of the point-of-care tests that you could do on the spot, they were doing it in the shopping centre.
7.121
NACCHO noted that health services—particularly community-led or controlled services—are a key resource for government in terms of raising community awareness. This is because ACCHOs are often a centre of the community in regional, rural, and remote areas and enable direct engagement with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples on road safety messages.
7.122
Dr Adam Heaton also called for greater investment in ACCHOs—and particularly health organisations—to deliver targeted campaigns on road safety and the risks of drink driving.
7.123
NRHA felt that there should be more investment in community-led campaigns for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and suggested that social media campaigns featuring high-profile Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander personalities could be used for this purpose.
Committee view
School-based education
7.124
The committee heard that there is support for embedding road safety education in schools, with the aim of equipping children and young people with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes for safe road use. The committee also heard that school-based road safety education should start as early as possible and be targeted based on age and associated road use (for example, very young people may use the road as a pedestrian, while those in their late teenage years may be looking to obtain their licence).
7.125
The committee also heard that efforts should be made to integrate road safety into the school curriculum, to support ongoing learning, assist with understanding key elements of road safety such as the contribution of speed to crash and injury risk, and promote road safety as a life skill—including routine maintenance and preparation for emergency situations. Programs should, so far as possible, also focus on safe behaviours and identifying risks, with a view to building a personal risk profile that can be expanded and adapted to a wide range of cases. Critically, education should not be delivered via one-off or one-day events, should not have too strong a focus on mechanical skills, and should not promote early licensure. Research indicates that this leads to over-confidence and increased crash risk.
7.126
The committee appreciates that there is research indicating that the value of school-based education (and education generally) to improving road safety outcomes is contested. However, evidence also indicates that this may be due to the content of relevant programs and how they are delivered.
7.127
Accordingly, and noting the focus on school-based education in several states and territories, the committee remains of the view that road safety education should be pursued. However, efforts should be made to ensure programs focus on equipping students with the skills necessary to identify and respond to risk.
7.128
Evidence also suggests support for consistency in school-based road safety education across Australia, underpinned by national standards. It appears that this is linked to support for consistent pre-licence training and licence conditions across jurisdictions.
7.129
The committee supports a nationally consistent approach to education and considers that the Commonwealth should work with other jurisdictions to develop and agree national standards. Noting the examples provided by stakeholders, the committee considers that part of this work should involve identifying current programs which may be suitable for national application.
7.130
Noting existing differences in road rules and the fact that even individual schools will have different curricula, the committee acknowledges that road safety education is likely to differ slightly between jurisdictions. However, the committee emphasises that key outcomes—particularly the ability to identify and respond appropriately to risks—should remain consistent.
7.131
The committee recommends that the Australian Government work with state and territory governments to develop and implement national standards for road safety education in schools. The standards should have a core focus on enabling students to identify, understand, and respond to road safety risks, and on sharing roads safely with other road users.
Pre-licence training and education
7.132
The committee heard that pre-licence training (including the paper-based education and testing undertaken before starting to drive and the instruction and supervision while holding a learner licence) does not align with global best practice in a variety of areas. Stakeholders indicated that insufficient attention is given to competency-based education and professional instruction, with learner drivers permitted to complete required practice hours with a licensed driver who is not required to possess particular qualifications, or expertise. Moreover, even if lessons are undertaken with a professional instructor, the quality of training can be variable.
7.133
The committee also heard that driver education must have a greater focus on sharing the road safely with other users. There was a particular emphasis on sharing the road safely with heavy vehicles—including matters such as blind spots and passing distances. Evidence also indicates that programs to allow learners to experience operating a heavy vehicle in controlled conditions (such as via simulations) may have merit. Safe behaviour around cyclists and other road users was also highlighted.
7.134
Evidence further indicated that increasing the focus in pre-licence education on managing risk—including route planning, decision-making that prioritises safety and hazard perception—are critical to enhancing road safety outcomes. Stakeholders noted that programs focused on hazard and risk management exist in some jurisdictions. Stakeholders also indicated that there must be a greater focus on driving in regional, rural, and remote areas, given that such areas present unique road safety challenges.
7.135
The committee heard that there may be merit in increasing the use of simulation-based training as a means of teaching competencies and helping new drivers prepare for high-risk situations that cannot be captured by paper-based education or via on-road training in a physical vehicle. Stakeholders also indicated that simulation-based training may be a useful way of collecting data to inform the development of road safety programs.
7.136
The committee considers that the Commonwealth should work with other jurisdictions to improve state- and territory-based licensing and training arrangements by increasing competency-based education and embedding consideration of the matters above (such as safe road sharing). Ultimately, the committee considers that training and licensing arrangements should be made consistent across jurisdictions. The Commonwealth may also wish to investigate options the use of simulation and game-based training.
7.137
While noting that post-licence training may help enable both new and more experienced drivers to respond effectively to emergency situations, research evidence indicates that such training also correlates with an increase in over-confidence leading to crash risk, particularly in young people. The committee does not make any recommendations about this matter.
7.138
The committee recommends that the Australian Government work with state and territory governments to increase the extent to which new drivers are required to demonstrate key competencies before receiving a learner or provisional licence. The committee also recommends that the following be embedded within the training framework for all drivers:
Sharing the road safely with other users, with specific competencies focused on sharing the road safely with heavy vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, and motorcyclists.
Driving on roads outside of metropolitan areas, with a focus on driving on rural and remote roads.
Responding to risks and building a personal ‘risk profile’.
Hazard perception, awareness, and response.
Licensing requirements and conditions
7.139
The committee heard there is support for greater (if not total) consistency in the application of licensing arrangements with stakeholders noting that different requirements and limitations across jurisdictions create challenges for drivers and other road safety stakeholders and may lead to increases in safety risk. The committee also heard that while certain restrictions (such as limits on driving at night and on the number of passengers) have proven to be effective, they have not been rolled out on a national basis.
7.140
The committee considers that the Commonwealth should work with other jurisdictions to harmonise licensing requirements and restrictions across Australia as far as possible. As part of this process, the Commonwealth should identify and support implementation of restrictions which have been shown to have the greatest impact in terms of improving road safety outcomes. The committee acknowledges that licensing requirements have in some cases been developed to respond to unique issues for the state or territory and that changes to such requirements takes time. Nevertheless, the committee considers that harmonising licensing arrangements across Australia is an important project that should be pursued.
7.141
The committee recommends that the Australian Government work with state and territory governments to harmonise licensing requirements and associated restrictions as far as possible. As part of this process, the committee considers that requirements and restrictions with the greatest impact on road safety outcomes should be identified, with national implementation of such measures supported.
7.142
The committee also heard that there is support for increasing the restrictions placed on motorcycle licences—variously covering direct access to licences; minimum permit tenure; age; early licensure; allowable power output for learner riders; and permissible driving hours. However, it appears that a number of these restrictions are not supported by motorcycle representative groups, who view such measures as attempts to discourage the use of motorcycles—particularly for younger people. These representative groups indicated that additional training (including over a person’s career) would be a more appropriate means of enhancing safety outcomes.
7.143
Noting divergent views on the most appropriate means of enhancing safety for motorcyclists, it is the committee’s view that further consideration—including with state and territory governments, motorcyclist peak bodies, and other road safety stakeholders—is required to develop solutions.
7.144
The committee recommends that the Australian Government work with state and territory governments, motorcycle associations and other stakeholders to investigate potential changes to motorcycle licensing requirements which will improve safety without unduly discouraging motorcycling as a transport choice.
Supporting Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities
7.145
Stakeholders identified a need for additional support for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities—particularly as regards culturally safe and appropriate training and access to licences. Evidence indicates that such arrangements are needed to help overcome systemic barriers to licensure and support safe road use by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
7.146
The committee is pleased that the National Road Safety Strategy 2021–2030 contemplates partnerships with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities to develop place-based, community-led strategies to address road safety. In addition, the committee notes that the former Joint Select Committee on Road Safety recommended a review of funding for programs that reduce barriers to licensure for disadvantaged groups.
7.147
While noting these matters, the committee considers it useful to reiterate the need for the Commonwealth and jurisdictions to work with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and the Aboriginal Community-Controlled sector to identify priority areas for Commonwealth and state funding. These should have a focus on removing barriers to licensure and ensuring Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have access to culturally safe, appropriate road safety education. The committee notes in this respect that several existing programs have been identified by inquiry participants that may be suitable for broader rollout.
7.148
Building on the work of the previous Joint Select Committee on Road Safety and noting proposed actions in the National Road Safety Strategy 2021–2030, the committee recommends that the Australian Government work with state and territory governments, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and the Aboriginal Community-Controlled sector to identify priority funding areas. These should have a focus on removing barriers to licensure and enabling access to culturally safe, appropriate road safety education.
Ongoing fitness to drive
7.149
The committee heard that existing processes to identify and assess drivers who may present road safety risks to age, medical impairment or disability require improvement. Stakeholders noted that there are not clear pathways to refer drivers for assessment, that assessments of driving capacity must include qualified occupational therapy driving assessors (OTDAs), and that access to assessments is limited due to resource constraints.
7.150
The committee considers that the Commonwealth should work with other jurisdictions to develop and agree national guidelines for the identification and assessment of at-risk drivers. The committee notes in this regard that the Victorian framework is considered the ‘gold standard’.
7.151
The committee also considers that steps should be taken to enable access to assessments by qualified OTDAs, including via additional subsidies under existing government programs. In this regard, stakeholders have noted challenges in accessing government programs that provide subsidies for driving assessments, which are only exacerbated by the lack of occupational therapists trained to conduct such assessments.
7.152
The committee recommends that the Australian Government work with state and territory governments and relevant peak bodies to:
develop national guidance for the identification and assessment of at-risk drivers by occupational therapy driving assessors (OTDAs); and
explore opportunities to subsidise access to assessments conducted by OTDAs—for example via existing health and disability programs.
Community education and awareness
7.153
The committee heard that road safety campaigns should target several of the same issues as road safety education more generally, including safe sharing of the road between light and heavy vehicles and vulnerable users, and driving in rural and remote areas. The committee notes that the previous Joint Select Committee on Road Safety recommended the Commonwealth support driver education campaigns with an emphasis on these matters.
7.154
However, stakeholders also drew attention to a need to support campaigns which encourage road users to regularly assess their driving ability, and to consider road use as a privilege rather than as a right.
7.155
In addition, the committee heard that campaigns should be developed and implemented to improve perceptions of certain groups of road users, with stakeholders noting that this may be of particular significance for the gig economy. The committee considers that there would be merit in the Commonwealth supporting campaigns with a focus on these matters, noting their alignment with other measures recommended elsewhere in this report.
7.156
Building on recommendations of the previous Joint Select Committee on Road Safety, the committee recommends that the Australian Government investigate opportunities to support road safety campaigns that:
encourage drivers to regularly evaluate their driving ability, including by self-referring for testing if necessary; and
improve perceptions of vulnerable road users, with a particular focus on pedestrians, cyclists, and delivery riders.
7.157
Critically, the committee also heard that insufficient attention is paid to evaluating the impacts of road safety campaigns, with stakeholders noting that robust evaluation is critical to ensuring the most effective campaigns are selected to be continued or expanded, and to gathering data to inform other road safety measures. The committee considers that a consistent approach to evaluating campaigns is needed as a matter of urgency.
7.158
The committee recommends that the Australian Government work with state and territory governments and research organisations to develop and implement a national framework for evaluating the effectiveness of road safety campaigns.
7.159
The committee also heard there is a need to support campaigns to improve safety for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. Stakeholders indicated that Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisations (ACCHOs) have the knowledge and connections to develop and implement such campaigns. The committee considers that the Commonwealth should partner with the community-controlled sector to support ACCHOs via additional investment. This could connect with other funding measures for that sector identified elsewhere in this report.
7.160
The committee recommends that the Australian Government partner with the Aboriginal Community-Controlled sector to increase investment in road safety campaigns which aim to improve safety for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and communities.