Road Traffic (Mail Zones) Amendment Bill

Ms SANDERSON ( Adelaide ) ( 10:45 :34 ): Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Road Traffic Act 1961. Read a first time.

Ms SANDERSON ( Adelaide ) ( 10:46 :03 ): I move:

That this bill be now read a second time.

The reasoning behind my introduction of the changes to the Road Traffic (Mail Zones) Amendment Bill 2017 is predicated on the difficulty I often have, and many people have, of finding a park in North Adelaide or in the city. This was definitely highlighted for me last year when I was attending the North Adelaide Primary School graduation. I drove around and around and around North Adelaide and kept passing these fantastic car parks in front of post office boxes that would have been terrific, but I could not park in front of them.

It occurred to me that we have these wonderful car parks available that are not available and that we are restricted from using 24 hours a day, seven days a week, when in fact the mail vans are only there from about 6pm to maybe a maximum of 7pm. They are only there for five minutes to pick up mail, so why take up a really perfect parking spot in the city, in North Adelaide, or in any of the suburbs where there are parking issues, when they are really not needed for all that time.

You see on a postbox, if you have read it, that your mail needs to be in by 6pm, and that is from Sunday through to Friday. It used to be next day delivery for 70¢, but now it is several days delivery for $1, so there is even less urgency for them to have unrestricted parking 24 hours a day, seven days a week because the mail is not in that big a hurry to get to us anymore.

When I attended the graduation at North Adelaide, I was speaking to the principal about how difficult it was to get a park. She commented that they had their first ever community concert and that they had received calls from around 30 grandparents who had driven quite long distances to come to see their grandchildren at the concert. They were not able to get a park anywhere, so they drove all the way home. I thought that if we could make a difference of even one park or two parks (in North Adelaide there are 12 and in the city there are 55), then that would have made a difference for those 12 grandparents. To me, it is just common sense.

Recently, the Adelaide City Council held a managing traffic and parking in North Adelaide community workshop. They also had an online survey for two months for which they received 1,200 submissions from people who completed the survey. From that survey, one of the questions was: is parking for residents a problem? Seventy-two per cent of residents said, yes, it was. On the question of whether parking for workers is a problem, 88 per cent of the workers in this area said yes and 79 per cent of traders said it was a problem. Is parking for visitors a problem? Fifty-two per cent of visitors said yes, but of course there would be fewer visitors filling in a survey that was distributed throughout Adelaide and North Adelaide.

Clearly, parking is an issue. It has been an issue for a great deal of time. I know it is also an issue in suburban areas. I know that getting a park along Prospect Road is very difficult. With more and more high-rise developments, parking is becoming even more at a premium. I particularly had in mind Adelaide and North Adelaide; however, obviously, if we amend the bill, then it would be valid for anywhere in the state, so think about whether or not this is relevant in your own electorate.

This is something that certainly should be considered, and I hope that I will receive the support of the Labor Party on what I think is just a very sensible bill. It is a win without any loss. Residents, workers, shop owners, businesspeople and visitors to the city will all have extra car parking available, and the mail delivery vans can still attend and pick up their mail from Sunday to Friday between 6pm and 7pm.

Last night, I was walking back to our wonderful Hindley Street car park. There is a postbox right in front of the car park, and I managed to chat to the deliveryman who I saw had arrived at five minutes to six. However, he did wait until after six to make sure that, if anyone had any late mail, it would get in. They really do stick to that 6pm because they need to get all the mail that has been put in.

I think the deliveryman said there was one mailbox in Rundle Mall that they sometimes clear during the day, but you cannot park in Rundle Mall anyway, so that would not affect the parking. Certainly, if there were issues, you would just change the parking in front of that particular postbox but, as a general rule, I think it seems crazy to hold up parks—55 in the city, 12 in North Adelaide and hundreds throughout the suburbs—24 hours a day, seven days a week, when realistically the pick-up is for about five minutes, six nights a week. I commend this bill to the house, and I hope I will have the support of the Labor Party.

Ms SANDERSON (Adelaide) (11:23): I would like to thank all the speakers on this bill so far. To reiterate, as a member of parliament it is important to be in tune with what is going on in your electorate. Whilst development issues are the number one priority in Prospect, car parking is most definitely the number one issue in North Adelaide, and probably car parking and development in the city are the things that are on my residents' minds. For many years I have thought, 'Why is it that you cannot park in front of an Australia Post postbox for 24 hours a day, seven days a week, all year, yet the mail pick-up is only between 6pm and 7pm, six days a week?'

Now we know that we do not even have next-day delivery, so if it was a few minutes off we could change it. If they needed from 6pm to 7.30pm to get their deliveries done, that would be no problem; it is really the idea of freeing up the car park. The people who are trying to put the mail in the mailbox are there throughout the day, but at the moment it is a no standing zone, so you cannot even stop in front the Australia Post postbox.

I am 100 per cent certain that car parking is an issue in North Adelaide. Although there are only 12 Australia Post postboxes in North Adelaide and 55 in the city, those 12 car parks make a big difference to the people who would be using them. There is a high turnover; they would be used throughout the day, as the member for Unley mentioned. If people can get a car park easily, they will quickly drop in and pick up a pie from the O'Connell Street bakery or they will pick up some flowers they see in the window for their wife on the way home, which I think should be encouraged.

From the recent surveying that Adelaide city council did, it is not only business owners but also workers and residents who have trouble with car parking. I had a business in North Adelaide on O'Connell Street and I had a business on Melbourne Street, and one of the main issues was staff having to go and move their car all the time because of parking. When we had our classes in the evening on O'Connell Street, students would be driving around for ages trying to find parks and then they would park far away, so they are walking back to their cars late at night in the dark. So even 12 car parks will help.

I did put in my original speech that North Adelaide Primary School had their first ever concert where all the family and grandparents were invited, and they had at least three phone calls from grandparents who had driven all the way from Parafield Gardens or Paralowie, a considerable distance, and they had driven around for 20 minutes to try to find a park to come to their grandchildren's concert, they could not find a park and they have driven all the way home.

Car parking is definitely an issue. I see this as one very small measure, which has no cost and is an easy way that you could open it up. I have spoken to an Australia Post franchisee owner; they do not have a problem with it. I think it is a win-win. It has no cost. It is in keeping with what the residents want. I support the bill, and I ask that members in the house think about this carefully and support it.

The house divided on second reading:

Ayes 17

Noes 20

Majority 3

Bell, T.S. Chapman, V.A. Duluk, S.
Gardner, J.A.W. Goldsworthy, R.M. Griffiths, S.P.
Knoll, S.K. McFetridge, D. Pederick, A.S.
Pengilly, M.R. Pisoni, D.G. Redmond, I.M.
Sanderson, R. (teller) Speirs, D. Treloar, P.A.
van Holst Pellekaan, D.C. Whetstone, T.J.  
Bedford, F.E. Bettison, Z.L. Bignell, L.W.K.
Caica, P. Close, S.E. Cook, N.F.
Digance, A.F.C. Gee, J.P. Hildyard, K.
Kenyon, T.R. (teller) Key, S.W. Koutsantonis, A.
Mullighan, S.C. Odenwalder, L.K. Picton, C.J.
Rankine, J.M. Rau, J.R. Snelling, J.J.
Weatherill, J.W. Wortley, D.  
Marshall, S.S. Vlahos, L.A. Tarzia, V.A.
Hughes, E.J. Williams, M.R. Brock, G.G.
Wingard, C. Piccolo, A.  

Second reading thus negatived.