Wednesday, 12 August 2026

 Sonja TERPSTRA (North-Eastern Metropolitan) (17:28): I rise today to speak on the independent assurance report called Reducing the Harm Caused by Distracted Drivers, which was submitted to the Parliament of Victoria by the Victorian Auditor-General’s Office. This report was submitted in June of this year, and the report inquires into the effectiveness of the distracted driver and seatbelt detection camera program, amongst other things. The Victorian Auditor-General acknowledges that the use of mobile devices when driving significantly increases the risk of road accidents, and as a result the distracted driver and seatbelt detection camera program was launched with the intention of improving road safety through raising awareness of the risks and laws around using mobile devices and not wearing seatbelts; increasing enforcement of these laws; and also reducing behaviours that raise the risk of road accidents, serious injuries and death.

In 2021 the then Department of Transport developed the Victorian Road Safety Strategy 2021–2030. This strategy was developed to address deaths and serious injuries on Victorian roads, with the main objective of the strategy being to halve deaths and serious injuries on Victorian roads by the year 2030. As part of this, the distracted driver and seatbelt detection camera program was established on 31 March 2023, first with a three-month trial period prior to its full enforcement on 1 July 2023. Originally the program was intended to run for a two-year period until July 2025. The government, however, reviewed this and in December 2024 decided to extend the program until June 2030. The audit discusses the different bodies involved in the implementation of the program and the company responsible for providing the cameras, physically placing them and collecting data, Jenoptik. Upon capturing images, Jenoptik initially uses an AI software program to determine if a driver captured on the camera may be committing an offence. It is only after review by Jenoptik’s team that the photo is then issued to Victoria Police, who determine if an offence is being committed and whether or not to therefore then issue an infringement notice to the driver. The report determined that Jenoptik is working well with Victoria Police, particularly in finalising site selection for cameras. Once Victoria Police have identified and recommended a site for camera deployment, Jenoptik has been seen to work well in determining the logistics and suitability of the site, assisting Victoria Police if alterations are then necessary.

The audit further mentions that the Victorian public can also recommend sites via the Cameras Save Lives website, not only for this program in particular but for Victoria’s whole camera safety program. The website was further updated in order to more clearly describe the process of how public suggestions for camera sites are managed. Furthermore, the report found the multistage verification process employed by Jenoptik and Victoria Police is working well, and data collected is used to further improve the authentication process, particularly when low-confidence images are being analysed. This is done through joint meetings between Jenoptik and Victoria Police, during which trends in images are also reviewed. Jenoptik then uses Victoria Police’s decisions regarding low-confidence images to improve its verification process.

The audit also found that there is further data that needs to be collected in order to better determine the effect the program is having on reducing road deaths and serious injury. It is safe to say that the program is still comparatively new and more work is to be done in data collection. With more data collected over a longer period of time, the effectiveness of the overall program can be better determined. Therefore more work is required, but the department has been working with the recommendations in the audit, and it actively adopted changes whilst the audit was taking place. What is for certain is that we cannot put a price on safety. Regardless of how effective this program may turn out to be, we must acknowledge that even if one life has been saved or one serious accident has been averted, then all of the time, effort and funding that goes into this program is worth it. We can only determine the most effective deterrent measures if we try them and then evaluate them. I commend this report to the house.