2015-12-09
Ms DUNN (Eastern Metropolitan) — I thank Mr Purcell for his motion. It certainly raises a lot of really important issues in terms of what it is trying to achieve. I will also talk to the amendment moved by Mr Leane.
We know Victoria is the only state where young people are eligible for a probationary driving licence at the age of 18. This could be a significant disadvantage for them, given what we know of other states and territories where young people can get their licence at 17 years of age. I believe in the Northern Territory it is even younger. In terms of what is happening at a nationwide level, Victoria has had this age limit for some years now and has been separate from the rest of Australia for near on 40 years. When we look across the different states, we see that New South Wales has a provisional licence, which is like our probationary licence, from 17 years of age. Queensland also has a provisional licence from 17 years of age, South Australia from 17 years of age, Tasmania from 17 years of age and Western Australia from 17 years of age. It is certainly worth exploring the licence structures in other Australian states and particularly the probationary driving age.
In terms of assessing the links between the 18 year old probationary driving age and high youth unemployment in regional areas, we know that youth unemployment is at crisis levels across many parts of Victoria. One out of every six young Victorians is currently unemployed; that is 90 000 young people who are out of work, missing out on learning skills, developing their careers, earning an income and contributing to their communities. It is the highest level of youth unemployment since the recession in the 1990s, and we know such high levels of unemployment have broad consequences for people, families and communities. Those consequences can be far ranging and include social isolation, poverty and physical and mental health impacts, to name just a few.
We also know that in some parts of Victoria youth unemployment is even higher, at one in five, and when we look at that data we see that in the north east of Melbourne, the Mornington Peninsula and western Victoria 20 per cent of young people are unemployed, and in Geelong and west Melbourne it is 21 per cent. In some of these places there are already high levels of social disadvantage. The reality is that if we cannot help young people find meaningful work, we are at risk of losing that generation of young people to limited life prospects and generational poverty. It would be a travesty if we allowed that to happen.
Mr Purcell’s motion looks at reviewing the impacts of separating the legal driving age and the legal drinking age. It is a confluence of many things when you turn 18 in the state of Victoria, although on the face of things, in terms of the data, raising the drinking age appears to save lives when you look at what is happening in other countries. Certainly in the US there is strong evidence that the higher drinking age saves lives and results in lower alcohol related harms generally.
The motion goes on to talk about considering relevant international licensing models and the positives and negatives, and when we look at what is happening in the world we see that in New Zealand the age is 16½ for a restricted licence, whereas the legal alcohol purchase age is 18. In the US, depending on what state you are in, the provisional licence age is either 16 or 17 years old, whereas the legal age for alcohol purchase is 21. In the European Union the age is generally 18, except for Austria and the UK, where it is 17, and in Japan it is 18. It would be interesting to contemplate what is happening in other countries around the world.
In terms of assessing the correlation between a reduced probationary driving age and the road toll, going back to past data, a discussion paper released by VicRoads in 2005 states that if the driving age was lowered to 17, the road toll would rise by 20 in the first year, with 250 people more seriously injured and 13 each year after, with 200 more serious injuries. That data is now 10 years old. It is important to consider the current learnings and evidence available in relation to the correlation between a reduced probationary driving age and the road toll, but the road toll data at the moment shows a lower road toll among young adults in Victoria than in other states. It is worth re examining this data to see what is going on, because there are a lot of contributing factors. The terms of an inquiry into these matters could allow a fulsome examination of all the issues that come into play in relation to the probationary driving age, the influence of alcohol, unemployment and other issues bundled together.
The Greens are happy to support the amendment that Mr Leane is proposing. It is important to look at the adequacy of current transport infrastructure and services, and at the heart of that is allowing people — not just young people, although young people generally bear the brunt of this — to get around the state by public transport. Most recently, I think in the last week, the residents of Port Campbell took a hit because Public Transport Victoria has now reversed a commitment to a bus extension between Camperdown and Timboon to include Port Campbell. That was a blow for that community and the people who want to utilise that service, including young people, some of whom want to access their learning institution or place of employment.
If the first part of the amendment looks at how to provide adequate public transport and other services to not only young people but people across the state, that would be a welcome piece of work, as would the second part of the amendment, which is about looking at strategies to remove barriers for people of non driving age to access employment, study and training. I think it is incumbent upon all governments to look at how they can remove barriers.
This amendment certainly broadens the inquiry enormously. Ultimately, as I understand it, the flavour of Mr Purcell’s motion is about making sure that young people have every opportunity to access work and education. The amendment enhances the terms that are listed here in relation to the inquiry, which needs to be broad ranging. There are important social issues at play around unemployment levels and the road toll that could have very serious consequences for young people, so we need to look at this very carefully.
The Greens believe this is well worth an inquiry to pursue the facts so that we can start to make informed decisions about the best way for young people to get every opportunity they can to access work and education. With that, the Greens will be supporting Mr Purcell’s motion and the amendment proposed by Mr Leane.