Wednesday, 19 February 2025
Bills
Transport Legislation Amendment (Vehicle Sharing Scheme Safety and Standards) Bill 2025
Please do not quote
Proof only
Transport Legislation Amendment (Vehicle Sharing Scheme Safety and Standards) Bill 2025
Statement of compatibility
Gabrielle WILLIAMS (Dandenong – Minister for Transport Infrastructure, Minister for Public and Active Transport) (10:41): In accordance with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006, I table a statement of compatibility in relation to the Transport Legislation Amendment (Vehicle Sharing Scheme Safety and Standards) Bill 2025:
Opening paragraphs
In accordance with section 28 of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (the Charter), I make this statement of compatibility with respect to the Transport Legislation Amendment (Vehicle Sharing Scheme Safety and Standards) Bill 2025 (the Bill).
In my opinion, the Bill, as introduced to the Legislative Assembly, is compatible with the human rights protected by the Charter. I have this opinion for the reasons outlined in this statement.
Overview
The purpose of the Bill is to amend the Road Safety Act 1986 (the Road Safety Act) to repeal provisions of that Act relating to vehicle sharing schemes and to make further provision for offences involving electric scooters, including by providing for traffic infringement notices to be issued.
The Bill also amends the Transport (Compliance and Miscellaneous) Act 1983 (the Transport Compliance Act) to insert provisions relating to vehicle sharing schemes, including the approval of vehicle sharing scheme operators, authorising agreements to operate a vehicle sharing scheme, and related offences.
Human rights issues
The human rights protected by the Charter that are relevant to the Bill are:
• the right to privacy and reputation (section 13 of the Charter);
• the right to freedom of expression (section 15); and
• the fair hearing right (section 24(1)).
Applications for vehicle sharing scheme operator approvals
Clause 8 of the Bill inserts into the Transport Compliance Act new Part VIA, which provides for:
1. a person to apply to the Secretary for approval to be an ‘approved category A scheme operator’ (ie, of a category A vehicle (eg, an electric scooter) sharing scheme) (new section 206; the Secretary’s determination of a person’s application being made under new section 207A);
2. an approved category A scheme operator to apply to the Secretary for renewal of their approval (new section 207C);
3. the Secretary to revoke an approved category A scheme operator’s approval, if the Secretary is satisfied of specified matters (new section 207D), and a requirement that notification of such a decision be published on the Department’s Internet site (new section 207F);
4. a requirement that the Secretary maintain a register of approved category A scheme operators (new section 207G); and
5. an approved category A scheme operator, or a person who proposes to operate a category B vehicle sharing scheme, to enter into an agreement with a municipal council to operate a relevant vehicle sharing scheme within the municipal district of that council (new section 207L).
These amendments are relevant to the rights to fair hearing (section 24(1)), privacy (section 13) and freedom of expression (section 15).
Fair hearing
Section 24(1) of the Charter relevantly provides that a party to a civil proceeding has the right to have the proceeding decided by a competent, independent and impartial court or tribunal after a fair and public hearing. A ‘civil proceeding’ is not limited to a proceeding decided by judicial decision-makers; it may encompass the decision-making procedures of administrative decision-makers with the power to determine private rights and interests. While recognising that Charter rights should be interpreted broadly, the terms ‘proceeding’ and ‘party’ suggest that section 24(1) was intended to apply only to decision-makers who conduct proceedings with parties.
In my view, the administrative decisions provided for in clause 8 of the Bill do not involve the conduct of proceedings with parties, so as to engage section 24(1) of the Charter. Further, it is understood that, unless a decision determines existing rights, the fair hearing right in section 24(1) is unlikely to apply. In the context of this Bill, decisions determining existing rights would be limited to the revocation of an approved category A scheme operator’s approval under new section 207D.
If, however, a broad reading of section 24(1) were adopted and it was understood that the fair hearing right was engaged by this Bill, this right would not be limited. The right to a fair hearing is concerned with the procedural fairness of a decision. The entire decision making process, including the availability of review, must be examined to determine whether the right in section 24(1) is limited. In my view, section 24(1) is not limited because of the following key procedural fairness safeguards provided for in the Bill:
• if the Secretary refuses to approve an applicant to be an approved category A scheme operator, or refuses to renew an approval, or revokes an approval, the written notice for the decision must include a statement of reasons and must inform the applicant that they may seek review of the decision (new sections 207A(5), 207C(4) and 207D(4));
• further, before the Secretary makes a decision to revoke an approved category A scheme operator’s approval, the Secretary must give written notice (new section 207E);
• a person may apply for internal review of each of the Secretary’s decisions outlined above (see paragraphs 1, 2, and 3) – ie, to refuse to approve, refuse to renew, or revoke the person’s approval to be an approved category A scheme operator (new section 207H);
• the Secretary must appoint a delegate, who did not make the original decision, to determine the application for internal review (new section 207J); and
• if the original decision is affirmed at the conclusion of the internal review, a person may apply to the Tribunal for review of that decision to affirm it (new section 207K).
Privacy and reputation, and freedom of expression
Section 13(a) of the Charter prohibits unlawful or arbitrary interferences with a person’s privacy. Arbitrary interferences are those that are capricious, unpredictable or unjust, as well as unreasonable because they are not proportionate to a legitimate aim sought. An interference with privacy can still be arbitrary even though it is lawful.
Section 13(b) of the Charter prohibits unlawful attacks on a person’s reputation.
Finally, section 15(2) of the Charter provides that every person has the right to freedom of expression, which includes the freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds (including freedom from being compelled to provide information).
New section 206(2) of the Bill provides that applications must include certain details about the person applying for approval (or renewal, pursuant to new section 207C(4)), and any prescribed information. Further, new section 207G requires the Secretary to maintain a register of approved category A scheme operators, including prescribed information in respect of those operators, which must be available for inspection on the Department’s Internet site.
By requiring applicants to provide certain information in their applications for approval to be an approved category A scheme operator, and by requiring the Secretary to publish on the Department’s Internet site certain information, the Bill may engage sections 13 and 15(2) of the Charter, to the extent that these provisions affect natural persons. I note that these provisions will largely apply to companies.
To the extent that these requirements do interfere with the right to privacy, any interference would be in accordance with law and proportionate to the legitimate aim of determining that an applicant is a fit and proper person. Further, the exact extent and nature of any interference will be determined by the content of any future regulations, which will be subject to the requirement on the Minister to produce a Human Rights Certificate, certifying its compatibility with the Charter. The Secretary’s power to request further information under new section 207 is necessary to facilitate the proper discharge of assessing applications, and is limited in scope to relevant information. Further, the Secretary will be obliged to act compatibly with an applicant’s right to privacy when exercising their functions under the Bill, including when requesting information.
Finally, new section 207F of the Bill requires the Secretary to ensure that notification of a decision to revoke approval is published on the Department’s Internet site. I do not consider that this requirement would engage the right to privacy in section 13(a) of the Charter, and the right not to have a person’s reputation unlawfully attacked in section 13(b). This is because such a notification would not include personal information of a private nature and would serve the legitimate and important purpose of making it known to the public that a vehicle scheme operator has had their approval revoked.
The Hon Gabrielle Williams MP
Minister for Public and Active Transport
Second reading
That this bill be now read a second time.
I ask that my second-reading speech be incorporated into Hansard.
Incorporated speech as follows:
The use of e-scooters provided under sharing schemes has proven to be popular in Victoria, with Melbournians, in particular, taking up the devices in high numbers. E-scooters made available via sharing schemes are a useful and popular mode of transport for people wanting to travel short distances. They help to ease congestion, are an affordable mode of transport and provide first and last mile access to public transport.
With a view to ensure the safety of e-scooter riders, pedestrians and other road users, the Victorian Government undertook a trial of the use of e-scooters throughout Victoria under certain conditions. This trial commenced in December 2021 in Ballarat and, from 1 February 2022, in select Melbourne council areas. E-scooter riders using these devices as part of the trial were required to follow the Road Rules, which include requirements for the wearing of helmets, restrictions on speed and requirements for where the e-scooters are able to be lawfully ridden.
On 19 July 2024, the Allan Labor Government announced that the trial would conclude in October 2024, permanently allowing sharing scheme and private e-scooters to operate across Victoria. The Government also announced that new legislation will be introduced in 2025 setting out new requirements for e-scooter share hire operators applying to councils to operate in their municipalities, with minimum standards to be enforced through a pre-approval scheme. This Bill fulfills that commitment.
The e-scooter trial shows us that e-scooters provide the community with a low cost and emission-reducing form of alternative transportation. Many Victorians have used them to successfully make millions of trips over the past three years. While e-scooters have become a staple form of transport, they are still new devices to many in the community. The Government has observed that compliance with the rules for the use of e-scooters could be improved. To support better enforcement of these rules, the Bill also enables Protective Service Officers (PSOs) to issue infringements for certain e-scooter offences.
The Bill makes important changes to deliver on the Government’s commitment to improving e-scooter safety and compliance and provide greater certainty to councils and sharing scheme operators which will make e-scooter use safer and enable the better management of parking and amenity issues.
Pre-approval requirement for share hire e-scooter operators
The Bill will provide local governments with better support to select vehicle sharing schemes within their local government areas by introducing a pre-approval requirement for prospective vehicle sharing scheme operators and imposing improved safety and technology standards on those operators. The Bill amends the Transport (Compliance and Miscellaneous) Act 1983 to introduce a new regulatory framework for operators of vehicle sharing schemes. The regulatory model will initially cover e-scooter sharing schemes, with powers to prescribe other vehicle types as new vehicle types are provided as part of vehicle sharing schemes.
These measures are intended to improve safety and accessibility of e-scooters, and improve amenity in public spaces. Whilst e-scooters provide many benefits in terms of transport and mobility, there have been issues with e-scooters, hired as part of a sharing scheme, being ridden on footpaths or parked in a way that blocks access, introduces tripping hazards, or otherwise creating an impact on the use or amenity of public spaces. The sharing scheme standards will address these issues by requiring operators of sharing scheme to implement systems, technologies and other safety measures.
The pre-approval process will be overseen by the Department of Transport and Planning. Operators will apply to the Secretary to the Department and provide evidence that the operators can comply with the scheme standards and that they are a fit and proper person.
The sharing scheme standards, which will be prescribed in regulations following the passage of the Bill, may include the following matters:
• Helmet use and verification, including measures to ensure that a helmet is made available to a hirer of an e-scooter and to verify that riders are wearing a helmet.
• Zone management, including capabilities to detect the location of sharing scheme vehicles and to slow or stop devices based on the location of the vehicle.
• Parking management, including measures to ensure that vehicles are parked appropriately at the end of a hire.
• Footpath detection, including requirements for sharing scheme vehicles to be fitted with technology to detect footpaths and take appropriate actions, such as playing an audio warning, or slowing or stopping the vehicle, when the vehicle is detected being ridden on a footpath.
• the detection of intoxicated riders and verification that riders are not otherwise impaired, including “cognitive reaction testing”.
• vehicle requirements, including vehicle identification, speakers for audio warnings and alerts, topple detection and other safety features.
The existing legislative provisions relating to the regulation of vehicle sharing scheme operators are set out in the Road Safety Act 1986. This includes the requirement for sharing scheme operators to enter into agreements with local councils before they commence operations in that local government area. These provisions will be repealed from the Road Safety Act 1986 and re-enacted in the Transport (Compliance and Miscellaneous) Act 1983 to form a comprehensive approach to regulating vehicle sharing scheme operations.
Enabling Protective Service Officers to issue infringements for certain e-scooter offences
The Bill will also provide the ability for PSOs to issue traffic infringement notices for e-scooter related offences. Currently, only police officers are able to enforce offences under the Road Rules that relate to e-scooters by issuing infringement notices to riders who are in breach of the Road Rules. This change is consistent with existing powers that PSOs have under the Road Safety Act 1986 to issue parking infringement notices and traffic infringement notices to motorists that occur in the vicinity of designated places PSOs have been assigned to protect. As e-scooters often provide the first and last mile connection to public transport services, providing PSOs with these additional powers will serve to improve enforcement capability within existing resources, and, in turn, support improved compliance by e-scooter riders with safety rules.
Conclusion
The Bill represents the Government’s continued commitment to improve transport options for the community but also its commitment to ensure that they are safe, accessible and improve the amenity of the community.
I commend the Bill to the house.
Cindy McLEISH (Eildon) (10:42): I move:
That this debate be adjourned.
Motion agreed to and debate adjourned.
Ordered that debate be adjourned for two weeks. Debate adjourned until Wednesday 5 March.