Parliamentary Speeches
EWINGSDALE SPEED CAMERA ( 18/10/2007)
Mr DONALD PAGE (Ballina) [5.06 p.m.]: I draw to the attention of the House my concerns about the Ewingsdale fixed speed camera located on the Pacific Highway. I have received more phone calls and correspondence from people questioning the accuracy of the speed camera than any other issue during my 19 years as the member for Ballina. The speed limit at that camera is 60 kilometres per hour. In no way do I condone speeding, however, I believe there is a strong case that this camera was faulty earlier this year. To date I have received 546 letters from individuals involving 859 infringements dealing with infringements from 28 March 2007 to date. However, the majority of infringements that have been disputed occurred between the end of March and the middle of July.
My constituents are adamant that they were not speeding. Many of the complaints come from local residents who drive past the camera on a regular basis and who are very familiar with its location. The speed camera warning signs are very prominent. Many people who have written to me after receiving infringement notices have excellent driving records: they have never had a speeding offence before. Some of the alleged offenders had witnesses in their car who attested to the fact that the driver was not speeding. The drivers and witnesses say they had their speed confirmed at the time by a roadside monitor at the southern approach to the camera giving a readout of the speed of each passing motorist.
I have made hundreds of representations to the Government regarding this matter, but the Government's response has been to rule out any question of the camera's accuracy. I am not satisfied with that response. The thing that convinces me that the camera was not accurate is information I have now obtained from the Office of State Revenue under freedom of information legislation. According to that information the average number of offences in the three days between 16 October and 18 October 2006 was 13. That number spiked to 906 offences recorded in the week between 25 April and 1 May 2007, or 129 per day. The average number of infringements issued per day between 28 March and 24 July, the period when the camera's accuracy is being questioned, was 97. There is a huge difference between 13 offences a day in October 2006 and 97 offences a day on average throughout the questionable period.
The Ewingsdale camera operates in two directions. It became operational in the southbound direction on 22 September 2006 and in the northbound direction on 29 March 2007. Some people might think that this two-way camera explains the increase, but one would have expected a twofold increase in infringements, not an eightfold to tenfold increase. Despite the fact that this camera was operational in both directions for only a quarter of last financial year, it was ranked number eight in the State's top money-earning fixed-speed cameras, raising $1.1 million in revenue for the State Government. While this camera has proved to be extremely lucrative for the Government, it is causing a great deal of hardship for many of my constituents. I have a number of examples of people who have lost or will lose their licences, and who have lost or will lose their jobs as a result of losing their licences, and who have others who depend on them for transport to vital services.
One young fellow who is employed full-time as a tradesperson has a young family whose sole source of support is his income. He stands to lose his licence. From 25 May to 18 June he received four infringement notices. His employers told him that he would lose his job if he lost his licence. He is adamant that he did not speed above the allowed 60 kilometres an hour on any occasion. Between 20 April and 21 May—a one-month period—another lady was issued with 15 penalty notices and the total of her fines comes to $1,617. Not only will she lose her licence but the cost of the fines will cause her financial hardship. Another lady, this time a single mother who lives out of town, received 11 penalty notices between 16 April and 31 May. She lives in an area with no public transport and will now be completely isolated with her children. These people and others knew that the camera was there so it simply does not make sense that one of them would speed past a camera 15 times in one month.
Many locals are planning a protest to express their anger and some are challenging the fines in court. However, a large number do not have the financial resources or ability to take time off work or to take court action. I am extremely unhappy with this situation. In light of the abnormally high number of infringements, around 97 per day in the late March to mid-July period compared to an average 12 per day normally, and based on the information that I received from the Office of State Revenue under freedom of information, I call on the Minister for Roads and the Treasurer to place a moratorium on the payment of infringement notices for three months. That will enable constituents to gather together evidence and facts and to challenge the accuracy of the camera in court.
A moratorium will also give the Government an opportunity to reconsider the issue in light of the information I placed before the House today. Finally, I note that there are precedents for inaccurate cameras in this State, and this Ewingsdale camera appears to be the latest case in point. This is a serious issue for my constituents. They stand to lose their licences and their jobs. I believe the evidence is fairly compelling that the abnormally large number of infringement notices issued—97 a day compared to 12 normally—indicates that there is a problem with the camera.
