❓ Hon Robin Chapple questions the Minister for Transport regarding updated bullbar guidelines, specifically concerning the removal of allowances for rural vehicles needing greater animal strike protection and the balance between rural safety and pedestrian safety. The Minister's response clarifies that the 2017 updates were proposed and for clarification only, with no changes to the 2015 requirements. Data on specific bullbar defects is not recorded.
AnsweredQoN 2053Legislative Council
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to updated guidelines for the manufacture and
installation of vehicle front protection systems (bullbars) in the State. These
updates were published in a circular to industry from the Department of
Transport in September 2017. This circular to industry claims to provide an
appropriate balance between the protection of vehicle occupants from animal
strike and the safety of pedestrians. However, specific reference to and consideration of
vehicles predominantly operated in rural and remote areas, where the chance of
large animal strikes is significant, appears to have been removed from the
latest iteration of industry guidelines. The previous circular to industry on
bullbar guidelines (May 2015), specifically referenced
‘country vehicles that travel extensively on country
roads may need a higher level of protection against a
collision with an animal such as a kangaroo or an emu.
In this case the more traditional bullbar design may
be desirable’, and so I ask
if the Minister will indicate: (a) if
allowances for vehicles predominantly operating in rural and remote areas
requiring a more traditional bullbar have been completely removed from the industry
guidelines released in September 2017; (b) if
the safety risks to country people being stranded, injured of killed as a
result of an animal strike has been considered equally to pedestrian safety in
metropolitan areas in the preparation of the new guidelines; (c) how
many defect notices have been issued on Western Australian registered vehicles
in the past three years as a result of the fitment of a more traditional
bullbar; and (d) the
technical criteria used by the department for deeming a bullbar to
be non-compliant and a full list of reasons for non-compliance listed in defect
notices in the past three years?
installation of vehicle front protection systems (bullbars) in the State. These
updates were published in a circular to industry from the Department of
Transport in September 2017. This circular to industry claims to provide an
appropriate balance between the protection of vehicle occupants from animal
strike and the safety of pedestrians. However, specific reference to and consideration of
vehicles predominantly operated in rural and remote areas, where the chance of
large animal strikes is significant, appears to have been removed from the
latest iteration of industry guidelines. The previous circular to industry on
bullbar guidelines (May 2015), specifically referenced
‘country vehicles that travel extensively on country
roads may need a higher level of protection against a
collision with an animal such as a kangaroo or an emu.
In this case the more traditional bullbar design may
be desirable’, and so I ask
if the Minister will indicate: (a) if
allowances for vehicles predominantly operating in rural and remote areas
requiring a more traditional bullbar have been completely removed from the industry
guidelines released in September 2017; (b) if
the safety risks to country people being stranded, injured of killed as a
result of an animal strike has been considered equally to pedestrian safety in
metropolitan areas in the preparation of the new guidelines; (c) how
many defect notices have been issued on Western Australian registered vehicles
in the past three years as a result of the fitment of a more traditional
bullbar; and (d) the
technical criteria used by the department for deeming a bullbar to
be non-compliant and a full list of reasons for non-compliance listed in defect
notices in the past three years?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
14 May 2019
Responded by
Minister for Environment representing the Minister for Transport
Response time
9 days
(a)-(b) The current Circular to Industry (CI) (May 2015) is published on DoT’s website. Proposed updates to this CI (September 2017) were circulated to industry as part of a stakeholder consultation process. The proposed updates are for clarification purposes only. The requirements have not changed from May 2015.
(c)-(d) Only the defect notice number is recorded by DoT. Specific defect items are not recorded.
(c)-(d) Only the defect notice number is recorded by DoT. Specific defect items are not recorded.
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.