❓ A WA parliamentary question addresses the relocation of Multanova speed cameras from regional to metropolitan areas, questioning the rationale behind the move despite higher rural road fatalities and probing a potential link to reduced infringement processing backlogs.
AnsweredQoN 375Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
MULTANOVA SPEED CAMERAS
I refer to the WA Police sending Multanova speed cameras into regional Western Australia under the banner of addressing road safety issues. At the time, the reason given for this move was that the higher number of fatal accidents on country roads needed to be addressed with the placement of speed cameras in these areas. (1) Despite the fact that as at 14 August there had been 91 fatal road crashes in country Western Australia and 52 in the metropolitan area, why have Multanovas been pulled back into the metropolitan area as of this week? (2) Can the minister confirm that during this same period, the backlog of speed camera infringements required to be processed had coincidentally been significantly reduced from a three to six-month wait to virtually no backlog at all? Mr J.C. KOBELKE
I refer to the WA Police sending Multanova speed cameras into regional Western Australia under the banner of addressing road safety issues. At the time, the reason given for this move was that the higher number of fatal accidents on country roads needed to be addressed with the placement of speed cameras in these areas. (1) Despite the fact that as at 14 August there had been 91 fatal road crashes in country Western Australia and 52 in the metropolitan area, why have Multanovas been pulled back into the metropolitan area as of this week? (2) Can the minister confirm that during this same period, the backlog of speed camera infringements required to be processed had coincidentally been significantly reduced from a three to six-month wait to virtually no backlog at all? Mr J.C. KOBELKE
AnswerView source ↗
(1)-(2) I will answer the second part of the question first. I know that the backlog has been reduced. The implication in the question was that that was due simply to shifting Multanovas from the city to the country, and I cannot confirm that. As the member has quite rightly pointed out, there have been a large number of fatalities on country roads. The police have operational procedures for locating speed cameras, and I understand that they were revisited to determine whether there should be a greater effort in country areas. That was done for a limited period and now the speed cameras have been brought back to the metropolitan area. I am yet to see a report on that, but, anecdotally, I understand that it had an impact in country areas. Initially, a very large number of people were caught speeding. This is only anecdotal information I gathered from talking to an officer; I have not received a formal report. About the same number of infringement notices were issued to drivers on country roads as were issued to drivers on city roads. Even though more vehicles drove past Multanovas on city roads, there was a much higher hit rate of drivers exceeding the speed limit on country roads. I understand that the number of infringement notices issued initially was quite high. That number then trailed off, which one might interpret as meaning that locating Multanovas in country areas had an educational effect. It did change behaviour. People were conscious of being caught speeding and therefore ameliorated the speed at which they drove. That seemed to have an effect. However, of course the police want to cover roads in both metropolitan and country areas. I concur with the implication in the question. I understand that a number of those Multanovas have been relocated for operation in the city area.
(1) Despite the fact that as at 14 August there had been 91 fatal road crashes in country Western Australia and 52 in the metropolitan area, why have Multanovas been pulled back into the metropolitan area as of this week? (2) Can the minister confirm that during this same period, the backlog of speed camera infringements required to be processed had coincidentally been significantly reduced from a three to six-month wait to virtually no backlog at all? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: (1)-(2) I will answer the second part of the question first. I know that the backlog has been reduced. The implication in the question was that that was due simply to shifting Multanovas from the city to the country, and I cannot confirm that. As the member has quite rightly pointed out, there have been a large number of fatalities on country roads. The police have operational procedures for locating speed cameras, and I understand that they were revisited to determine whether there should be a greater effort in country areas. That was done for a limited period and now the speed cameras have been brought back to the metropolitan area. I am yet to see a report on that, but, anecdotally, I understand that it had an impact in country areas. Initially, a very large number of people were caught speeding. This is only anecdotal information I gathered from talking to an officer; I have not received a formal report. About the same number of infringement notices were issued to drivers on country roads as were issued to drivers on city roads. Even though more vehicles drove past Multanovas on city roads, there was a much higher hit rate of drivers exceeding the speed limit on country roads. I understand that the number of infringement notices issued initially was quite high. That number then trailed off, which one might interpret as meaning that locating Multanovas in country areas had an educational effect. It did change behaviour. People were conscious of being caught speeding and therefore ameliorated the speed at which they drove. That seemed to have an effect. However, of course the police want to cover roads in both metropolitan and country areas. I concur with the implication in the question. I understand that a number of those Multanovas have been relocated for operation in the city area.
(2) Can the minister confirm that during this same period, the backlog of speed camera infringements required to be processed had coincidentally been significantly reduced from a three to six-month wait to virtually no backlog at all? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: (1)-(2) I will answer the second part of the question first. I know that the backlog has been reduced. The implication in the question was that that was due simply to shifting Multanovas from the city to the country, and I cannot confirm that. As the member has quite rightly pointed out, there have been a large number of fatalities on country roads. The police have operational procedures for locating speed cameras, and I understand that they were revisited to determine whether there should be a greater effort in country areas. That was done for a limited period and now the speed cameras have been brought back to the metropolitan area. I am yet to see a report on that, but, anecdotally, I understand that it had an impact in country areas. Initially, a very large number of people were caught speeding. This is only anecdotal information I gathered from talking to an officer; I have not received a formal report. About the same number of infringement notices were issued to drivers on country roads as were issued to drivers on city roads. Even though more vehicles drove past Multanovas on city roads, there was a much higher hit rate of drivers exceeding the speed limit on country roads. I understand that the number of infringement notices issued initially was quite high. That number then trailed off, which one might interpret as meaning that locating Multanovas in country areas had an educational effect. It did change behaviour. People were conscious of being caught speeding and therefore ameliorated the speed at which they drove. That seemed to have an effect. However, of course the police want to cover roads in both metropolitan and country areas. I concur with the implication in the question. I understand that a number of those Multanovas have been relocated for operation in the city area.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: (1)-(2) I will answer the second part of the question first. I know that the backlog has been reduced. The implication in the question was that that was due simply to shifting Multanovas from the city to the country, and I cannot confirm that. As the member has quite rightly pointed out, there have been a large number of fatalities on country roads. The police have operational procedures for locating speed cameras, and I understand that they were revisited to determine whether there should be a greater effort in country areas. That was done for a limited period and now the speed cameras have been brought back to the metropolitan area. I am yet to see a report on that, but, anecdotally, I understand that it had an impact in country areas. Initially, a very large number of people were caught speeding. This is only anecdotal information I gathered from talking to an officer; I have not received a formal report. About the same number of infringement notices were issued to drivers on country roads as were issued to drivers on city roads. Even though more vehicles drove past Multanovas on city roads, there was a much higher hit rate of drivers exceeding the speed limit on country roads. I understand that the number of infringement notices issued initially was quite high. That number then trailed off, which one might interpret as meaning that locating Multanovas in country areas had an educational effect. It did change behaviour. People were conscious of being caught speeding and therefore ameliorated the speed at which they drove. That seemed to have an effect. However, of course the police want to cover roads in both metropolitan and country areas. I concur with the implication in the question. I understand that a number of those Multanovas have been relocated for operation in the city area.
(1)-(2) I will answer the second part of the question first. I know that the backlog has been reduced. The implication in the question was that that was due simply to shifting Multanovas from the city to the country, and I cannot confirm that. As the member has quite rightly pointed out, there have been a large number of fatalities on country roads. The police have operational procedures for locating speed cameras, and I understand that they were revisited to determine whether there should be a greater effort in country areas. That was done for a limited period and now the speed cameras have been brought back to the metropolitan area. I am yet to see a report on that, but, anecdotally, I understand that it had an impact in country areas. Initially, a very large number of people were caught speeding. This is only anecdotal information I gathered from talking to an officer; I have not received a formal report. About the same number of infringement notices were issued to drivers on country roads as were issued to drivers on city roads. Even though more vehicles drove past Multanovas on city roads, there was a much higher hit rate of drivers exceeding the speed limit on country roads. I understand that the number of infringement notices issued initially was quite high. That number then trailed off, which one might interpret as meaning that locating Multanovas in country areas had an educational effect. It did change behaviour. People were conscious of being caught speeding and therefore ameliorated the speed at which they drove. That seemed to have an effect. However, of course the police want to cover roads in both metropolitan and country areas. I concur with the implication in the question. I understand that a number of those Multanovas have been relocated for operation in the city area.
(1) Despite the fact that as at 14 August there had been 91 fatal road crashes in country Western Australia and 52 in the metropolitan area, why have Multanovas been pulled back into the metropolitan area as of this week? (2) Can the minister confirm that during this same period, the backlog of speed camera infringements required to be processed had coincidentally been significantly reduced from a three to six-month wait to virtually no backlog at all? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: (1)-(2) I will answer the second part of the question first. I know that the backlog has been reduced. The implication in the question was that that was due simply to shifting Multanovas from the city to the country, and I cannot confirm that. As the member has quite rightly pointed out, there have been a large number of fatalities on country roads. The police have operational procedures for locating speed cameras, and I understand that they were revisited to determine whether there should be a greater effort in country areas. That was done for a limited period and now the speed cameras have been brought back to the metropolitan area. I am yet to see a report on that, but, anecdotally, I understand that it had an impact in country areas. Initially, a very large number of people were caught speeding. This is only anecdotal information I gathered from talking to an officer; I have not received a formal report. About the same number of infringement notices were issued to drivers on country roads as were issued to drivers on city roads. Even though more vehicles drove past Multanovas on city roads, there was a much higher hit rate of drivers exceeding the speed limit on country roads. I understand that the number of infringement notices issued initially was quite high. That number then trailed off, which one might interpret as meaning that locating Multanovas in country areas had an educational effect. It did change behaviour. People were conscious of being caught speeding and therefore ameliorated the speed at which they drove. That seemed to have an effect. However, of course the police want to cover roads in both metropolitan and country areas. I concur with the implication in the question. I understand that a number of those Multanovas have been relocated for operation in the city area.
(2) Can the minister confirm that during this same period, the backlog of speed camera infringements required to be processed had coincidentally been significantly reduced from a three to six-month wait to virtually no backlog at all? Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: (1)-(2) I will answer the second part of the question first. I know that the backlog has been reduced. The implication in the question was that that was due simply to shifting Multanovas from the city to the country, and I cannot confirm that. As the member has quite rightly pointed out, there have been a large number of fatalities on country roads. The police have operational procedures for locating speed cameras, and I understand that they were revisited to determine whether there should be a greater effort in country areas. That was done for a limited period and now the speed cameras have been brought back to the metropolitan area. I am yet to see a report on that, but, anecdotally, I understand that it had an impact in country areas. Initially, a very large number of people were caught speeding. This is only anecdotal information I gathered from talking to an officer; I have not received a formal report. About the same number of infringement notices were issued to drivers on country roads as were issued to drivers on city roads. Even though more vehicles drove past Multanovas on city roads, there was a much higher hit rate of drivers exceeding the speed limit on country roads. I understand that the number of infringement notices issued initially was quite high. That number then trailed off, which one might interpret as meaning that locating Multanovas in country areas had an educational effect. It did change behaviour. People were conscious of being caught speeding and therefore ameliorated the speed at which they drove. That seemed to have an effect. However, of course the police want to cover roads in both metropolitan and country areas. I concur with the implication in the question. I understand that a number of those Multanovas have been relocated for operation in the city area.
Mr J.C. KOBELKE replied: (1)-(2) I will answer the second part of the question first. I know that the backlog has been reduced. The implication in the question was that that was due simply to shifting Multanovas from the city to the country, and I cannot confirm that. As the member has quite rightly pointed out, there have been a large number of fatalities on country roads. The police have operational procedures for locating speed cameras, and I understand that they were revisited to determine whether there should be a greater effort in country areas. That was done for a limited period and now the speed cameras have been brought back to the metropolitan area. I am yet to see a report on that, but, anecdotally, I understand that it had an impact in country areas. Initially, a very large number of people were caught speeding. This is only anecdotal information I gathered from talking to an officer; I have not received a formal report. About the same number of infringement notices were issued to drivers on country roads as were issued to drivers on city roads. Even though more vehicles drove past Multanovas on city roads, there was a much higher hit rate of drivers exceeding the speed limit on country roads. I understand that the number of infringement notices issued initially was quite high. That number then trailed off, which one might interpret as meaning that locating Multanovas in country areas had an educational effect. It did change behaviour. People were conscious of being caught speeding and therefore ameliorated the speed at which they drove. That seemed to have an effect. However, of course the police want to cover roads in both metropolitan and country areas. I concur with the implication in the question. I understand that a number of those Multanovas have been relocated for operation in the city area.
(1)-(2) I will answer the second part of the question first. I know that the backlog has been reduced. The implication in the question was that that was due simply to shifting Multanovas from the city to the country, and I cannot confirm that. As the member has quite rightly pointed out, there have been a large number of fatalities on country roads. The police have operational procedures for locating speed cameras, and I understand that they were revisited to determine whether there should be a greater effort in country areas. That was done for a limited period and now the speed cameras have been brought back to the metropolitan area. I am yet to see a report on that, but, anecdotally, I understand that it had an impact in country areas. Initially, a very large number of people were caught speeding. This is only anecdotal information I gathered from talking to an officer; I have not received a formal report. About the same number of infringement notices were issued to drivers on country roads as were issued to drivers on city roads. Even though more vehicles drove past Multanovas on city roads, there was a much higher hit rate of drivers exceeding the speed limit on country roads. I understand that the number of infringement notices issued initially was quite high. That number then trailed off, which one might interpret as meaning that locating Multanovas in country areas had an educational effect. It did change behaviour. People were conscious of being caught speeding and therefore ameliorated the speed at which they drove. That seemed to have an effect. However, of course the police want to cover roads in both metropolitan and country areas. I concur with the implication in the question. I understand that a number of those Multanovas have been relocated for operation in the city area.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.