Debate resumed from an earlier hour.

Ms ELENI PETINOS (Miranda) (14:47): On behalf of the Opposition I speak in debate on the Fines Amendment (Parking Fines) Bill 2024. The Opposition will support this bill, which amends the Fines Act 1996 to improve the transparency and fairness of the parking fine system by ensuring that drivers receive on‑the‑spot notifications of parking fines. I stress that the bill does not reverse the significant reforms undertaken by the previous Coalition Government but instead makes minor changes to improve the Fines Act 1996 to better support motorists. Specifically, it does not remove the ability of councils to issue ticketless fines but instead requires that drivers be issued with on-the-spot notifications of any offences. Said notice can be the penalty notice itself or a short description of the offence and a notice stating that a fine will be sent to the driver.

All members of this place no doubt support the principle of improving the driving experience for motorists across New South Wales. No-one likes to receive a parking fine, and frequently our electorate offices are where our constituents go when they feel they have been treated unfairly, whether that be when a sign is obscured by a tree or when other circumstances arise. This bill is a response to concerns raised by motorists around the current ticketless parking fine system, particularly the difficulty in gathering evidence when a driver wants to seek a review of the fine; the reduced impact of a fine to act as an immediate deterrent and influence behaviour; and that a driver can receive multiple parking infringements before receiving notification via post or the Service NSW app. It is important to note that the bill is supported by the NRMA. On 17 September, NRMA spokesperson Peter Khoury said:

Motorists who abuse the limited public parking spaces available obviously deserve to be fined, however ticketless parking fines removed transparency and made it almost impossible for motorists to contest their fine if they felt they had a legitimate case.

The Opposition believes that the parking fine system should first and foremost be about correcting dangerous illegal behaviour, rather than revenue raising. In 2023-24, 822,310 ticketless fines were issued throughout the State, up 49 per cent from the 551,441 ticketless fines issued in 2022-23. Too often, motorists drive off without being aware they have been issued with a fine or are being issued with multiple fines for the same parking offence without being aware of the initial infringement.

This bill will allow motorists to correct their behaviour without further enforcement by prohibiting a fine being issued for a parking offence if a fine for the same kind of offence was issued within the previous seven days, for the same vehicle in the same location, when no notification was placed on the vehicle for the earlier offence. Furthermore, the bill provides exceptions for the issuing of notices in circumstances where it is unsafe to attach a notification, the vehicle is parked in a prescribed parking zone, the vehicle is not stationary, or the regulations permit a notification not to be attached.

I have said from the outset that the Opposition supports the bill, but I place on record some of our concerns. The lack of a definition of what is considered "unsafe" could have significant impacts on enforcement for motorists. As mentioned previously, a penalty notice or notification does not need to be issued if it is deemed unsafe. In her second reading speech the Minister provided an example of an unsafe situation "where a motorist may be behaving in a threatening manner". That is not satisfactory given the reliance on the definition for a motorist to challenge a fine. Furthermore, while I understand that the lack of a definition in the bill was intentional and is flagged to be addressed in the regulation, the Opposition prefers that the term be defined in the legislation, or that clearer information on the intention of the term in the regulation be available at this point in time. Before concluding, I draw the attention of the House to the fact that in her speech in reply in the other place the Minister for Finance said:

I thank my husband, George, for his wise counsel, astute political antenna and practical and commonsense approach.

It would be fair for one to be intrigued by her tribute and wonder what expertise Mr Houssos has in relation to parking fines. In the past, there was controversy over potential conflicts of interest when the Minister for Finance was responsible for insurance matters while her husband was employed in government relations for the Insurance Council of Australia. My attention was then drawn to a listing for Waverley Local Court on Tuesday 5 December 2023 forR v George Arthur Houssos. I am advised that court case related to the issue of a ticketless parking fine to Mr Houssos.

It is important to put on record that the mystery has been solved and the commonsense changes the Minister first demanded in her letter to councils in March 2024, and which are now introduced in this bill, all arose from Mr Houssos' experience before Waverley Local Court in December last year. That also explains the pace at which the legislation has been introduced and the lack of information in certain regards. Despite those concerns, the Opposition does feel that this bill builds upon the achievements of the previous Coalition Government in this space and will give the public confidence that parking enforcement will be open, transparent and uniform—which we encourage Government members and Minister Houssos to be. I commend the bill to the House.

Ms JULIA FINN (Granville) (14:54): I contribute to debate on the Fines Amendment (Parking Fines) Bill 2024, which makes amendments to the Fines Act to improve the transparency and fairness of the parking fines system. The bill ensures drivers receive on-the-spot notifications for parking fines instead of ticketless fines, of which they are notified by mail. The former Government introduced the ticketless parking fine system, known as print and post, in May 2020. It allowed councils and other agencies to issue parking fines without first giving drivers an immediate notification. In a single year, the number of ticketless parking fines issued by councils increased by 49 per cent, from 551,441 in 2022-23 to 822,310 in 2023-24. There was a 54 per cent increase in the dollar value of ticketless parking fines collected by councils.

It is important to note that not all councils issue ticketless parking fines. Only 50 councils across the State are responsible for the massive uptick in parking fine revenue. The key concerns around ticketless parking fines include fairness and the difficulty in gathering evidence in the event that the driver seeks a review of the fine. When a person goes back to their car and sees a parking fine, they can look and notice that the sign was obscured by trees, was completely faded or was knocked over by a car. I have successfully supported people to review parking fines when those things have occurred and they were able to take a photo. If a person gets a fine a fortnight or so later, they do not have that access.

Another concern is the reduced impact of a fine to act as an immediate deterrent. That is very, very obvious. Also, a driver can receive multiple parking infringements before receiving a notification by post or in the Service NSW app. If a person does not understand which rule is in place—for example, when there are multiple signs on the same post—and they park there on a regular basis, they will not know for weeks. I am very disappointed that Cumberland City Council, which covers most of my electorate, was one of the 50 councils that began using the ticketless fine system. In 2023 the council issued 12,026 ticketless parking fines, totalling $2,428,525. Cumberland council also disgraced itself around the time the ticketless parking fines were introduced, which was in the middle of the COVID restrictions, by being the only council in Sydney that did not reduce parking fines during COVID.

That was under the leadership of then Mayor Steve Christou. Whilst he was trying to make himself out to be a champion of everyone in Western Sydney during the awful longer lockdown that we endured in Western Sydney, he was still issuing parking fines to everybody. That included people in my electorate who lived in Westmead, in areas where there are two-hour parking zones and no off-street parking. They had been directed to work from home under the COVID rules and were all getting parking fines. There was no leniency shown by the council at the time under Steve Christou's leadership.

Then the council embraced the ticketless parking fines. The council has a specially fitted out Tesla. The parking officer drives down the street and inputs all the information in the car. All the information in the report is ready to go when he gets back to the office. It has improved the efficiency of issuing parking fines for the council enormously. It is not fair or reasonable to ratepayers, particularly in an area where there is a lot of disadvantage already, such as in the Cumberland area. I am very pleased to say that recently the council, led by incoming Mayor Ola Hamed, decided to no longer issue ticketless parking fines. In March the Minister for Finance wrote to all councils in New South Wales urging them to improve their practices of issuing parking fines, and particularly urging the 50 councils that use ticketless parking fines to address the shortcomings by providing drivers with an on-the-spot notification. Perhaps park the Tesla, leave a notification on the car and maybe use it to generate a report back in the office, but make sure you let people know they have done the wrong thing and give them the opportunity to make an appeal.

People come to see members of Parliament all the time to complain about having received a parking fine. It is even harder for people who say they got a parking fine that they cannot afford to pay and do not even remember parking illegally. We cannot do anything to help those people because they have no record of the act. Sometimes they did not even know they had done the wrong thing—or at least that is their claim—but they are stuck with a parking fine because they were not able to take photos or capture any evidence of what might have transpired. People often appeal a parking fine on the basis that they had a specialist appointment but the specialist ran late, they got back to the car and found they had received a parking fine. But if they do not receive the fine for a few weeks, it is very hard to make that argument. It is most unfair. The bill goes a long way towards improving fairness when issuing parking fines in New South Wales.

No-one likes getting parking fines. Sometimes people know they did the wrong thing, but sometimes they have no idea. If they have no idea they got fined until a few weeks later, it is absolutely unfair. The growth in the number of parking fines since ticketless parking fines were introduced by the previous Government is reflective of the magnitude of this gross unfairness as it is so much easier to issue parking fines but so much harder to appeal against them. Important exemptions can apply where councils and parking officers can still issue a ticketless parking fine, including not being required to leave an on-the-spot notification when it is unsafe to do so. In the past, parking officers have been assaulted. We do not want to increase the risk of that happening again. That is why exemptions will apply but only in circumstances when it is unsafe to leave a notification.

I urge the Government and the Minister, in particular, to make sure that we are vigilant about councils taking advantage of the exemption of not being able to leave a notification because it is unsafe to do so and that they do it only on rare occasions. They should not use the exemption as a get-out clause that enables rangers to continue driving around and issuing packing fines that arrive by mail weeks later when people cannot appeal them. I place on record that I am disappointed Opposition members chose to launch a personal attack on the Minister's husband for having received a parking fine and thought that was somehow relevant to bring to the debate. It is tacky and uncalled for. We do not need to do that in this Chamber. This is an important reform for everyone in New South Wales. I commend the bill to the House.

Ms LIZA BUTLER (South Coast) (15:03): The Fines Amendment (Parking Fines) Bill 2024 makes a number of much-needed amendments to the Fines Act 1996 to strengthen the transparency and fairness of the parking fine system. Why is this an issue? When the former Government introduced the ticketless parking fine system in 2020, it allowed councils to issue parking fines without first giving drivers an immediate notification. Unfortunately, the existing system has a number of problems—namely, that it lacks transparency and does not give procedural fairness. The people of the South Coast know this all too well, as Shoalhaven City Council trialled the system in 2022. What the residents of the Shoalhaven experienced are the exact reasons the Minns Government is making the amendments in the bill.

Constituents told us that when they had parked their cars they did not know whether they were at risk of getting a fine in the mail two weeks later. In some cases, even when they had moved their vehicles, they were still getting fined, meaning they were receiving multiple parking infringements before receiving a notification via post or via the Service NSW app. It revealed a lack of transparency and a lack of fairness, and Shoalhaven council did not proceed with ticketless parking once the trial had ended. The centrepiece of the amendments is ensuring that on‑the‑spot notification of parking fines will be required. This requirement is designed to ensure that members of the public are afforded the due process they deserve when they incur parking fines. The bill will require authorised officers of local councils and New South Wales government agencies to place notification of a fine, or the fine itself, on the offending vehicle when the fine is issued. Only in very limited circumstances will it be permissible not to leave a notification on the vehicle.

As the Minister for Finance has indicated, the exceptions to the requirement to leave a notification will not be a hall pass for issuing authorities. The exceptions come with safeguards to ensure the integrity of the reforms, and it is worth taking a moment to mention a few of them. If the issuing authority chooses not to leave a notice on a vehicle, the agency will be required to provide the reasoning behind that decision. The reasoning will need to be clear and adequate and explain why a notification was not left. If requested, the issuing agency must provide the reasons for the lack of notification to both the driver and to Revenue NSW. Revenue NSW may also consider the lack of a notification when receiving a request for the review of a fine. Additionally, the reasons for not leaving a notification will need to be recorded and lodged with the head of the issuing agency. Issuing agencies will be required to prepare and publish reports on the use of any exceptions. If any issuing authority begins to overuse or misuse an exception, it will become overwhelmingly apparent. These measures are important for the transparency of the system and to ensure that the public have the means of holding issuing authorities to account.

The people of New South Wales deserve to have the best opportunity to manage their parking fines as quickly and judiciously as possible. To support this aim, the bill provides that, if no notification is left on the vehicle, the officer will be required to post the fine within seven days of the offence occurring. If that does not happen, the fine will be void. The invalidation of fines, if the issuing authority chooses not to comply with the legislation or the regulations, is an integral component to ensuring the effectiveness of the amendments in the bill. There is no room for these provisions to be ignored or misinterpreted. Fines can and will be invalidated if the people of New South Wales are not afforded the due process that the bill offers them.

For far too long, people have been dealing with a demonstrably difficult system for parking fines in New South Wales. The Minns Labor Government got rid of secret speeding fines, and now we are getting rid of secret parking fines. We want to make sure that the parking regime is working as intended, including keeping pedestrians and other road users safe. But we also want to make sure that people understand what they are doing wrong when they are doing it and give them a timely opportunity to correct their behaviour. The bill achieves those objectives for the people of New South Wales in a measurable and meaningful way. I commend the bill to the House.

Ms CHARISHMA KALIYANDA (Liverpool) (15:08): I make a contribution to debate on this timely and important legislation, which seeks to reintroduce fairness to a system that is causing significant frustration among drivers and community members—and understandably so. The Fines Amendment (Parking Fines) Bill 2024 continues the work that the Minns Labor Government began when it got rid of secret speeding fines by getting rid of secret parking fines. Unfair parking fines are often a topic of discussion at social and family gatherings across our community. Everyone has a horror story. People being fined multiple times in one day, people being fined after their vehicle broke down in an inopportune location and people being fined for parking in a disability parking space, despite having a valid disability parking permit, are just some of the many cases that have led to public frustration about the practice of issuing ticketless fines and the sheer exasperation with a process that nets local councils tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars, yet does very little to change parking behaviours—which is the fundamental point of issuing financial penalties, or fines, in the first place.

The system that was introduced by the previous Government, without much thought about how it would impact families, has been an absolute failure. The reforms proposed in the bill are important and necessary to address those problems and ensure that the system meets community expectations by rebuilding transparency and giving procedural fairness to our community. The bill will ensure a more consistent approach across New South Wales and deliver a uniform experience for motorists. The bill requires council to attach an on-the-spot notification to a vehicle. That could be the penalty notice itself or a short description of the offence and a notice that the fine will be sent to them, unless it is unsafe to attach a notification, the vehicle is parked in a prescribed parking zone, the vehicle is not stationary or the regulations permit a notification not to be attached.

The bill appropriately balances public interest considerations in respect of procedural fairness and the safety of officers. Of note, the exceptions in respect of safety will not require an officer to attach an on-the-spot notification nor take images where they have reasonable grounds to have safety concerns. I note that in 2019 in Liverpool there were two separate incidents within the space of a week where parking rangers were assaulted while issuing fines. That was in response to people who were inappropriately parked during school hours, and the assaults occurred in full view of school children, which is highly unfortunate.

The New South Wales Government understands that local councils are concerned about the safety of infringement officers and abuse and aggression when they are issuing tickets. From early on, the Government has emphasised the need to protect parking officers in their workplace. While the majority of the public exercises civility and respect with their fellow citizens, especially those who are just doing their jobs, we appreciate that the job of a parking officer can be a challenging one that involves risks to their safety. In acknowledging that, the bill contains an exemption that means that parking officers will not be required to leave an on-the-spot notification where it is unsafe to do so. It is important to note that infringement notices are already issued in person by officers using a digital device, and that they often take photos as evidence for inclusion with the posted fine or upon request by the person who has been fined.

Currently, a person convicted of common assault not resulting in actual bodily harm may be imprisoned for up to two years. Assault with actual bodily harm could see a person sentenced for up to five years. A crime against a council law enforcement officer is an aggravating factor that could be considered by a court when determining the length of the sentence. Hopefully, those deterrents will put paid to the concerns about the risk of parking officer safety and will result in a situation where there is balance between the safety of those issuing fines and the procedural fairness that must be afforded to our community members. Should officers rely on an exception, they are required to record why they concluded that the exception applied in the circumstances and provide this reasoning to Revenue NSW or a person who has been fined for a parking offence if requested.

In terms of why a parking fine is not invalidated if no physical notice is provided, the legislation is clear: The officer must attach a notification to the vehicle if the vehicle is stationary. However, in some cases it may not be possible for this to be attached—for example, if the car drives off before they can attach the notification or if it is unsafe for the officer to do so. In that case, if the notification was not left but there was sufficient evidence provided by the council officer, such as photographs, it must be taken into consideration for the purposes of a review and the invalidation of a fine will occur if there is no notification—for example, there was a reason for it not to be left under the legislation and there were no photographs or evidence taken of the offence. That is a significant failure and warrants an invalidation.

The bill also addresses procedural fairness issues I outlined previously where community members received a notification in the mail of a fine weeks after and have lost the opportunity to gather evidence or immediately contest a fine. That has left them in a situation of believing that a fine should not have applied in that circumstance but are unable to provide the evidence in responding to that because of the time that lapsed between the alleged offence having occurred and the fine being sent to the person.

In relation to the money that has been netted from ticketless fines by councils in my local community in 2023, Fairfield City Council issued 21,470 ticketless parking fines, netting a total of $5,136,623. That is just more than Liverpool City Council, which issued 20,114 ticketless parking fines, netting a total of $3,220,188. However, both of those councils pale in comparison with the City of Sydney, which issued 265,181 ticketless parking fines, netting a total of $42,405,468. That is three of many councils across our State that have issued ticketless parking fines across a number of years. As members can understand, the issue is felt widely and deeply by members of our community, who are frustrated and who see themselves as having been denied procedural fairness in many instances. The bill is exactly the way we need to go about rebuilding community trust in a system that should be looking to change behaviour and not just revenue raise. I commend the bill to the House.

Mr EDMOND ATALLA (Mount Druitt) (15:17): I make a brief contribution in support of the Fines Amendment (Parking Fines) Bill 2024. The bill reaffirms this Government's commitment to fairness, transparency and a parking fines system that reflects community expectations for New South Wales. The bill is a clear step forward following on from our action to eliminate secret speeding fines, and now we are taking the same approach with parking fines. For too long, drivers have been left confused and frustrated by parking fines not being placed on their vehicles, leading them to unknowingly commit repeat infringements or receive fines weeks later by mail. That approach has been particularly harsh on families and individuals who are simply going about their day and then are blindsided by unexpected penalties. The lack of immediate notification has contributed to a system that many view as neither transparent nor procedurally fair.

The Fines Amendment (Parking Fines) Bill 2024 seeks to directly address those concerns by requiring that, wherever possible, a physical notification be left on a vehicle at the time a fine is issued. That measure aims to provide motorists with immediate awareness of a parking violation, establishing a more transparent and equitable process that eliminates surprise fines. However, we also understand there are a few specific circumstances where leaving a notification might not be safe or feasible, and the bill accommodates those exceptions responsibly.

In most cases, the expectation is clear that drivers will receive a notification upon returning to their vehicle. If an officer does not leave one, they will need a valid reason recorded in detail. Exceptions include situations where it would be unsafe to leave a notice, such as severe weather conditions or when the parking enforcement officer's safety is at risk due to aggressive behaviour. By ensuring that officers document the rationale for these exceptions, and that the reasons are reviewed and reported by the issuing agency, both the public interest and officer safety are protected while enhancing accountability. This ensures that the process cannot be misused and gives transparency to the public around how these exceptions are applied.

To further improve the system's transparency, the Government is introducing several additional requirements. Councils and issuing agencies will be required to publicly report on instances where exceptions were applied. This transparency will allow us to monitor and, if necessary, refine the system to meet evolving community standards. Officers will be expected to photograph both the offence and the notification left on the vehicle. Should a motorist contest a fine, these photographs will be available as evidence for Revenue NSW or for the motorist upon request, streamlining the review process and upholding procedural fairness.

The bill prohibits issuing multiple fines for the same parking offence within a week without notification. This addresses a key frustration in the current system, where drivers can be fined repeatedly before they are even aware of their first offence. Further, by enforcing on-the-spot notifications in all practical situations, New South Wales will move toward a consistent, statewide approach to parking fines. The bill also specifies that noncompliance with notification and documentation requirements, such as failure to photograph the offence or issue a penalty notice within seven days, may invalidate the fine. The Minns Government recognises that, whilst most of the public treat parking officers with respect, enforcement can present safety risks. Therefore, the bill ensures that parking officers are exempt from leaving notifications in unsafe conditions, as well as in specific restricted parking zones like national parks or enclosed parking areas that use automated licence plate recognition.

Unlike traffic offences, which are detected scientifically by cameras and do not require officer discretion, parking infringements often require judgement calls by officers. The flexibility to exempt New South Wales police from the notification requirement, given their need for mobility and focus on road safety, is also warranted, as they must remain agile to respond to emergencies. As we transition to this new system, councils and agencies will be given adequate time to adjust their operations to comply with these changes, while still recognising the urgent need to implement a more equitable and transparent system for drivers across New South Wales.

In closing, this legislation represents necessary reform to a longstanding and complex issue. The Fines Amendment (Parking Fines) Bill 2024 addresses community concerns by creating a system that is fair, transparent and consistent across the State. I am pleased to support the bill, which will ultimately foster greater accountability and trust between motorists, councils and enforcement agencies across New South Wales. I commend the bill to the House.

Ms KYLIE WILKINSON (East Hills) (15:23): The Fines Amendment (Parking Fines) Bill 2024 is an integral piece of legislation that is designed to reform the current parking fines system in New South Wales. The bill follows years of a hodgepodge approach to notifications for parking fines in the State and firmly establishes that there needs to be notification of a fine left on a vehicle. I have had several complaints from members of my community outlining the problems caused to them simply because they were not aware that they had received a parking fine, so I am glad to see the changes outlined in the bill. Previous speakers detailed the improvements to the parking fines system. They covered issues such as when it is appropriate to not take a photograph of a vehicle that has incurred a parking fine and when it is appropriate for an officer to not issue an on-the-spot notification of an offence. They also spoke about the regulations that will accompany this new legislation.

I take this opportunity to state that the bill has not come about without lengthy consideration and investigation. In looking into the matter, I was advised that 115 of the 177 issuing agencies that can impose parking fines typically do so electronically. At least 30 agencies have confirmed that they never leave any notification on an infringed car. This statistic vexed me deeply. There are undoubtedly motorists driving off from a location, completely unaware that they had incurred a parking fine. In March this year Minister Houssos wrote to 128 councils to express her concern and seek their support for change, after which Revenue NSW surveyed councils to understand what changes they would make as a result. I am advised that of the 86 respondents, 46 per cent indicated that they would not consider leaving a notification on a vehicle unless they were required to do so by law. There is clearly an opportunity for legislative change in this space, which the Government is seizing. The bill also makes it a requirement to leave an on-the-spot notification on vehicles when a parking fine is issued and to take photographs of the offence.

There are many benefits to the improved parking fines regime. To begin with, drivers will be made aware of their parking offences as soon as they occur, allowing them to manage their fines in a far quicker manner. Secondly, there will be the opportunity for significant behavioural change in motorists. In being made aware that they have committed an offence as soon as it occurs, people will be able to alter their behaviour immediately. While the default will be to leave a notification on the vehicle, the bill provides for exceptions to that obligation. For example, there will be prescribed zones where no notification may be left on a vehicle, with these limited areas being strictly defined and signposted. The regulations will specify the requirements for such signposting, including the wording, height, font, colour and dimensions of the signs, and their location or position. The regulations will also prescribe any other circumstances in which leaving an on-the-spot notification will not be required; however, these will be limited and carefully applied.

The bill leaves no room for spurious reasoning to be recorded when an on-the-spot notification has not been left. The reasons will need to be clear and concise, making it apparent why no notification was left. The regulations may prescribe requirements around how such reasons are to be recorded. These reasons will be considered when the penalty is reviewed. If they are not recorded, the penalty will be invalidated. Where no notification is left on a vehicle, the penalty must be issued within seven days of the incurring of the fine. If it is not, the fine will be invalidated. This will ensure that people have the time and the means to deal with their fines as soon as practicably possible.

New South Wales is currently living through a cost-of-living crisis and dealing with inflation levels that have not been seen for a number of years. The bill addresses unfair processes that can result in motorists receiving multiple parking fines before they even know about the first offence. The bill also provides relief to motorists who are simply trying to do the right thing but have been hampered by complex and confusing signage. I am pleased to support the bill.

Ms DONNA DAVIS (Parramatta) (15:29): I make a brief contribution in support of the Fines Amendment (Parking Fines) Bill 2024, which is designed to ensure improved and more efficient outcomes in managing parking fines. The obligations and compliance measures built into the reform allow for a transparent and equitable system that promotes behavioural change through clear messaging and timely notifications. The Minns Labor Government is one that listens. When the community flagged its concerns about secret speeding fines, we got rid of them. Now we are getting rid of secret parking fines. Frustration among drivers and community members over the unfair system is high, which is fair enough and understandable. Members opposite may even have finally seen the light. It is amazing what a different perspective can bring when they take the time to seriously consider the negative ramifications of a system they introduced without much thought about how it would impact families just going about their day. There are serious problems with the existing system: it lacks transparency and does not give procedural fairness.

It is only a Minns Labor Government that will make the important and necessary reforms to address problems and ensure the system meets community expectations. Adopting this legislation will ensure a consistent approach across New South Wales and deliver a uniform experience for motorists. The Minns Labor Government legislation will set higher standards by requiring councils to attach an on‑the‑spot notification to a vehicle. This could be the penalty notice itself, or a short description of the offence, and notice that a fine will be sent to them. The requirement applies unless it is unsafe to attach a notification because the vehicle is parked in a prescribed parking zone, the vehicle is not stationary, or the regulations permit a notification not to be attached. The bill appropriately balances public interest considerations in respect of procedural fairness and the safety of officers. It requires officers, should they rely on an exception, to make a record of why the officer concluded that the exception applied in the circumstances and provide this reasoning to Revenue NSW, or a person who has been fined for a parking offence, if requested.

Expanding on my colleagues' previous references to the circumstances in which an on-the-spot notification is not required, such circumstances will be limited but necessary—for example, where a motorist has parked in an unsafe location or where there are extreme weather conditions that would endanger an officer. In those circumstances, the officer will be required to post the fine within seven days of the offence occurring and record a sufficient reason as to why notification was not left. However, there will be no room for surreptitiousness in avoiding leaving on-the-spot notifications. The rules around when a notification may not be left will be made extremely clear, both in legislation and regulation, and there will be no room for error. If issuing authorities choose to ignore or avoid the requirements of the legislation, fines will be invalidated.

In her second reading speech, Minister Houssos spoke about unacceptable behaviours that may be faced by issuing officers, particularly when fines are being issued. Cases of abusive conduct directed towards issuing officers have been reported. The media has reported that parking officers have dealt with being abused, spat on, punched or left with serious injuries. Those behaviours are totally unacceptable and should be avoided at all costs. This issue has previously been raised in the Parliament. It is worth emphasising aspects of the penalties that apply for these acts. While the majority of the public do not behave in such a fashion, the impact of the few who do can be significant. Under the Crimes Act 1900, common assault carries a maximum penalty of two years imprisonment, and an assault that involves actual bodily harm carries a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment.

In addition, under the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, whether the victim is a council law enforcement officer and the offence arose because of their occupation is considered in the determination of a higher sentence. The Act also considers whether a victim was vulnerable due to their occupation. If they were, it may result in a higher penalty. I clearly state that there is no place for assault or abuse in our society. An individual approaching a ranger and swearing and threatening assault would be an appropriate reason for a notification to not be left on the vehicle. The recorded reasons need to clarify why the witnessed behaviour of the member of the public or the motorist was unsafe and will need to be shared with Revenue NSW and the fine recipient where required.

In its wisdom, the former Government introduced the ticketless parking fine system, also known as "print and post", in May 2020, which allowed councils and other agencies to issue parking fines without first giving drivers an immediate notification. I am glad to say that the City of Parramatta made the wise decision not to go down that path. Historically, the usual practice of councils and other issuing authorities was to issue the penalty notice on the spot. However, over time, the number of ticketless parking fines issued by post has risen dramatically. In a single year, the number of ticketless parking fines issued by councils increased by 49 per cent on the previous year, from 551,441 issued in 2022-23 to 822,310 in 2023‑24, which resulted in a 54 per cent increase in the dollar value of ticketless parking fines collected by councils in New South Wales. It is no wonder that Minister Houssos felt the need to act.

In March 2024 the Minister wrote to all 128 councils, urging those who use ticketless parking fines to address the shortcoming in their approach. There are two overriding concerns: a lack of transparency for drivers and a lack of fairness. Under the current system when drivers park they do not know if they are at risk of getting a fine in the mail two weeks later. The fine's impact is reduced because it does not act as a deterrent and influence behaviour. A driver can receive multiple parking infringements before they even receive a notification via post or the Service NSW app. Our reforms address those concerns by increasing transparency and fairness in the system.

A question has been asked around why the rules will not apply to New South Wales Government cameras. There is a big difference in both the gravity and the risk to the public when it comes to a speeding fine in comparison with a parking fine. Parking for 30 minutes over the parking limit and speeding in a school zone are two incredibly different situations. We are talking about a moving vehicle versus a stationary vehicle, for a start. When it comes to parking fines, there is a level of judgement applied by the parking officer. With fixed speed and red light cameras, there is no judgement applied but, rather, a scientific basis to detection.

The people of New South Wales deserve adequate notification of parking fines when they occur. However, there will be exceptions. To ensure that the reforms operate as intended, those exceptions will be prescribed in regulations and the authorised officer must record their reason for not doing so. Fines will be invalided if that reason is not recorded. I cannot stress that enough. To ensure there is transparency in how exceptions are used, issuing agencies will be required to report on the use of exceptions and to make public those reports. That ensures that we cover those bases and that sound legislation is presented to the Parliament. I am pleased to support the bill.

Ms JENNY LEONG (Newtown) (15:39): I indicate that The Greens will support the Fines Amendment (Parking Fines) Bill 2024. We agree absolutely with the Government that local councils should be required to issue on-the-spot notifications to drivers when issuing parking fines unless it is concerning or unsafe for them to do so. The bill will set higher standards for councils beyond just paper tickets, including requiring councils to take photos of offences, invalidating repeat ticketless parking fines, and introducing data reporting rules to monitor the implementation of the legislation and evaluate if any future reforms are necessary.

It appears that Sydney has a parking fine addiction. According to Compare the Market, we rank fifth in the global list of cities with the most expensive driving fines. We punch way above our weight in parking fines specifically, with single overstay tickets coming in at up to $220 per infringement in Sydney. The Newtown electorate office has heard from people who have received fines as high as $772 for a single parking infringement while unintentionally displaying an out-of-date disabled parking permit and despite purchasing a ticket. That is a truly eye-watering amount of money, especially in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis. If somebody living on support payments gets a fine, it could mean that they do not eat for a couple of weeks or are unable to pay for rent or essential medication.

Ticketless fines only serve to make it easier for councils to issue astronomical fines, and they certainly have helped to drain the pockets of drivers. Let me be clear that there is also a financial disparity. It is recognised that people who park incorrectly in dangerous places or disabled parking spots should be fined. The issue is that people have been repeatedly parking in places and thinking it is acceptable to park there without realising they have been getting tickets. This is not about trying to provide protection to those who deliberately park in unsafe areas or places they are not allowed to park. This is about trying to make sure that there is transparency about where people can and cannot park for those who park in a place where a fine would be issued.

Since the introduction of the new rules, government statistics show a 49 per cent jump in ticketless parking fines issued in the 2023-24 financial year. Over that same period, revenue increased by 14 per cent and the number of tickets issued increased by 9 per cent. In February the release of a City of Sydney document called "Parking Ranger Goals" showed that inspectors are expected to be "highly productive", issuing fines for a "variety of offences". I stress the irony that the City of Sydney has said that it opted into ticketless parking because of concerns about ranger safety while at the same time it pushed them towards what seem to be concerning and ridiculous productivity targets.

When it comes to fining people, I recall a disturbing moment in the early days of COVID when I saw that the local police station was tasked with trying to increase its number of fines for jaywalkers in the Newtown electorate. At the start of the pandemic, people did not know if the disease was transmitted by air or by touch. They chose not to press the button to cross the road for fear that there was a risk of contracting the virus. They then got fined for jaywalking across the road rather than pressing the button. The idea that we set key performance indicators for either parking rangers or police officers to issue a certain number of fines is of huge concern. I did my local member duty that morning and stood at the intersection pressing the button for all the people commuting to work until we managed to call the police off from issuing jaywalking fines.

In all seriousness, ranger safety is a real issue when considering the impacts of ticketed fines. We acknowledge that the United Services Union has raised concerns about the proposed changes to prohibit ticketless parking fines because of the risk of abuse and the risk to worker safety. The Greens hear those concerns. Councils need to do more to address that by protecting their workers and relaxing quotas and targets, which will ensure that parking rangers are not forced to over police parking to meet key targets and can instead look at sensible ways to ensure people are parking safely.

For some residents in the inner city, parking fines are built into the cost of living. For example, we have been repeatedly contacted by residents in Park Street, Erskineville, who have flagged that their street is too narrow to safely accommodate passing traffic and parked cars. While there has been an ongoing challenge to manage the narrowness of the road, drivers have been parking on the kerb from time to time to allow enough space for passing traffic to get through. They have received repeated fines for attempting to try to create more safety so that cars are not wiped out on the side of the road. These are complex issues. The Newtown electorate is in the middle of an inner city area. I am certainly not advocating for making it easier for cars to be the primary mode of transport, but we must recognise that no level of government should cash in and make money from this in the middle of a cost‑of-living crisis.

I move now to what I consider to be the key point of this issue. One of the biggest inequities with fines is that they are not progressive. Whether somebody earns $400,000 a year or $25,000 a year, they are charged the same for a fine. The impact of a fine if you earn $25,000 a year or $400,000 a year is not proportional. Therefore, The Greens support the idea of not criminalising poverty. We should not further punish people on lower incomes by making them pay a fine that is disproportionately high. We should have an equitable fining system. We must ensure that we do not encourage a situation where people have to consistently raise concerns about their financial insecurity in a cost-of-living crisis and ask to have fines waived. I appreciate that fines are often successfully waived when people are suffering from financial hardship, but many transparency issues need to be looked at.

The final issue I raise is the disproportionate impact of fines on people who cannot afford to pay them. It so often adds to ongoing cycles of poverty when people receive fines but are unable to pay them, and they then lose their licence as a result or have some of their income taken from them. Being unable to drive to work as a result of not being able to pay fines creates other issues and is a vicious cycle. I recognise that this has a disproportionate impact on First Nations people. The Redfern Legal Centre has raised that there is often a significant delay in a fine arriving, either by post or electronically, to give people less time to contest it. That is another big issue faced by renters in the State. People can move every six, 12 or 18 months and, as a result, may not be aware of a fine that they have been issued.

I end by adding something beyond the scope of the bill that I hope that the Minister will look into. Some councils choose to set parking meters to the maximum time that a car can park in a spot, rather than the minimum. I note that the Minister is in the Chamber listening to my contribution, and I wonder whether this is a Fair Trading issue rather than a local government or parking issue. Any member who has stood at one of those quite annoying electronic machines and had to press the button to reduce the time will know that it is time consuming and a hassle. Some councils choose to set it at the minimum and people can increase the time to how much they need, but other councils set the maximum for, say, a four‑hour parking slot so people have to stand there and press the button to reduce the time in small increments. There is a hope that people will get frustrated by that process, they will tap away and the council will collect more money from them, even though they only need to park there for half an hour. I hope that the Minister for Finance will look at this as part of the next stage of the review.

Ms LIESL TESCH (Gosford) (15:49): No‑one likes getting a parking fine. But what is worse is finding out about it two weeks later—sometimes after unknowingly incurring multiple tickets. That is the reality drivers across New South Wales have faced since the previous Government introduced ticketless parking fines in 2020. I thank the Minister for Finance—I think I will call her the "Minister for Procedural Fairness and Transparency"—Mrs Courtney Houssos from the other place for the work that she has done in trying to make things fairer for the people who are using our roads. I also thank her team for their hard work on the bill.

Under the current system, drivers no longer find a notice on their vehicle. Instead, the fine is sent by post, often arriving weeks after the incident. Over the last financial year alone, councils issued more than 822,000 ticketless fines, a staggering 49 per cent increase over the year before, resulting in over $158 million in revenue. In the Central Coast local government area, over 15,320 ticketless parking fines were issued to a value of over $4 million. While I feel sorry for councils—the bill may mean a loss of income—issuing ticketless parking fines is unfair and fails to disincentivise unsafe behaviour until weeks later, when drivers, often furious, receive a notification in the post. Often drivers return to their cars completely unaware that they have been booked and therefore do not have a chance to document evidence if they wish to contest the fine. They cannot say, "I took a photo of the sign and everything else." In my electorate, some drivers have incurred multiple fines before even receiving the first ticket in the mail.

That is why today we are debating commonsense legislation that aims to bring fairness, transparency and prompt accountability back to our parking fine system. The bill will require councils to place a notification on the vehicle at the time of the infraction, with sensible exemptions for cases where parking officers face a hazardous or unsafe situation. Like all frontline workers, parking officers sometimes deal with challenging interactions with the public and the exemption respects their safety. The bill also introduces several critical safeguards to prevent the unfair accumulation of fines. Our legislation will invalidate any repeat fines issued within seven days of an initial ticket unless the driver has received a prior notification. We are requiring councils to take photos of each offence, which will be provided to Revenue NSW or the driver if requested. That will streamline the review process and give drivers more clarity and peace of mind.

Too often, drivers have approached my electorate office after receiving sometimes multiple fines. With weeks having passed since the alleged offence and no photo evidence being provided, community members have no choice but to accept the fine regardless of concerns about its legitimacy. I thank the people who have taken the time to contact my office in their attempt to get out of their fines. I even received a letter from a gentleman who thanked me for trying to get him out of a fine that he thought was unfair even though we were not able to. In addition, the reform includes new data reporting rules to track the use of the exceptions. Those rules will add transparency, ensuring that we can continuously evaluate and refine the system as needed.

The New South Wales Government has worked closely with councils, the NRMA, Local Government NSW, the Law Society of New South Wales and Community Legal Centres NSW to implement sensible reform in this space. While some councils have shown a willingness to improve their practices, others have been reluctant, highlighting the need for consistent statewide standards that meet community expectations. Let me be clear: This legislation does not prevent councils from taking immediate steps to adopt on‑the‑spot notifications in the interests of motorists and our communities. I encourage them to do so. These reforms are not just about parking fines; they are about fairness, transparency and trust in our system. Together, let us ensure that New South Wales has a parking fine system that is clear and equitable, and serves the best interests of our community. I thank our "Minister for Procedural Fairness and Transparency"—the finance Minister from the other place, Courtney Houssos—for her work, and I thank her team for pulling this together.

Mrs WENDY TUCKERMAN (Goulburn) (15:53): I contribute to debate on the Fines Amendment (Parking Fines) Bill 2024, which responds to concerns from members of the public who have received parking fines sometime after an alleged offence was committed. The concern about any fine received sometime after an alleged offence is easily understandable, whether it is a parking fine, a speeding fine or any other kind of fine. Curiously, though, the bill addresses only parking fines. Interestingly, we have heard nothing from the Minister about surprise speeding fines arriving in the mail weeks or months after the alleged offence has occurred. The bill even explicitly excludes from its operation parking fines issued by police.

Revenue NSW administers parking fines for several local councils under agreements. The Minister could have easily changed the terms of those agreements to implement the on‑the‑spot notice requirements contained in the bill. It seeks to return us to a last century, paper‑based system rather than explore twenty‑first century digital solutions to the problem, such as real‑time emails or text messages to the registered owner of the vehicle that a parking fine has been issued. Local Government NSW President Councillor Darriea Turley commented that local councils' "greatest concern is the very real risk to the safety and wellbeing of compliance officers". She added:

This decision will put rangers right back in harm's way …

Councils' primary responsibility remains the safety and wellbeing of their staff. One of the main reasons many councils introduced ticketless fines was to reduce the incidence of verbal and physical abuse of employees.

Councils that adopted ticketless enforcement and vehicle-mounted camera technology have reported a reduction in these incidents as a result."

The other concern raised by Councillor Turley relates to councils' significant investment in new technology to issue infringements. She said:

Many hundreds of thousands of dollars have been invested by councils across NSW on technology, cars, cameras and software …

With ongoing cost-shifting and the current financial climate affecting councils' ability to provide the services and facilities their communities deserve, these parking reforms would significantly impact council budgets.

Unsurprisingly, Councillor Turley also pointed to the double standards involved in the New South Wales Government imposing on‑the‑spot paper fine notifications while continuing to issue ticketless fines, including for offences identified through cameras that look inside a vehicle to see if a driver is using a mobile phone or wearing a seatbelt, with no prior warning given. The Government has further legislated for ticketless speeding fines based on the use of point-to-point cameras. The United Services Union also slammed the Labor Government for its failure to give due weight to the real threat to the welfare of its members who work as parking inspectors. General Secretary Graeme Kelly commented:

Removing ticketless parking fines will take rangers back to the bad old days where they suffered broken jaws, black eyes and daily abuse for simply doing their job.

…

The NSW government will be responsible for every assault suffered by a parking ranger from now on.

He also said:

Everytime a parking inspector is punched, spat on or abused they'll be able to thank the NSW government for making a difficult situation even more dangerous …We've had council rangers who've been put in comas, had their jaws broken, been spat on and abused with the most foul mouthed tirades.

Only a few months ago a man who ran down into a parking ranger in Enmore putting him in a coma for two weeks and leaving him with life changing brain and spinal injuries …

Parking rangers have a tough job and like every other worker in this state they deserve to go home each day, not end up in a coma in hospital.

Unfortunately, the Minister effectively brushed aside those concerns by referring to the fact that parking inspectors, as council law enforcement officers, are covered by the provisions for the aggravating factors in sentencing under the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. However, a possible longer sentence does not directly protect a parking inspector at risk from enraged, entitled drivers about to be issued with a parking ticket. The bill also contains a provision that puts the onus on a parking inspector to assess a risk of imminent assault from a disgruntled driver about to be issued a ticket and, while retreating to safety, to attempt to capture images justifying the decision to avoid risk.

The United Services Union insists that "ticketless parking allows rangers to avoid dangerous situations", not record them. The union spoke to the Government about linking council fines to the car registration system so that drivers could get a text within minutes of getting a fine so they could gather evidence if they wanted to challenge it—which I proposed earlier in my contribution. Mr Kelly hits the nail on the head with this insightful comment:

Parking inspectors have a tough job, people love to hate them, and now the state government is looking for a sugar hit to bump up its popularity and is picking on them too and putting them in danger, it's disgraceful.

The Government is choosing to ignore well‑articulated concerns of both local government and the relevant union. I urge the Minister to begin work on modern digital solutions as proposed by the United Services Union. Notwithstanding those observations, the Opposition acknowledges the Government is ultimately responsible for the design of its fine system and will not oppose the bill.

Ms LYNDA VOLTZ (Auburn) (15:59): I contribute to debate on the Fines Amendment (Parking Fines) Bill 2024. I was pleased to hear members on the other side of the Chamber join with and herald the unions. It is a pity that when they were in government they did not heed what the union movement had been saying and implement any changes of their own. The member for Goulburn raised the question of the capacity of councils to pay for these changes. I have some sympathy for those councils because, indeed, it was members on the other side of the Chamber who drew up the boundaries and amalgamated the councils. In Auburn, Cumberland council lost its high‑paying rates, and there is a dogleg border around Granville station. Instead of following Parramatta Road, there is a deliberate dogleg that takes out ratepayers and denies Cumberland council those additional rates to pay for services. If it had that money to pay for those services, it may be able to pay a few more parking rangers to walk around together.

This legislation requires notification of a penalty notice for a parking offence to be attached to a vehicle. If the ranger does not do so, they must record the reasons and provide a copy. It also requires an appropriate officer who issues a penalty notice for a parking offence to take images that show the act or omission that constitutes the parking offence. Everybody who has worked in an electorate office knows of the heartache of older residents, pensioners and those on welfare benefits who find out three or four weeks after the event that they have received a parking offence. It is distressing and stressful. They come to us with their concerns, wanting help from members of Parliament. Electorate officers do a good job of trying to help them to work out when and why the parking offence happened and whether there was, in fact, a breach of the rules. The bill helps to get around that problem.

People have a right to know if they have been fined. The idea that a ranger can send out a real-time email to notify people of an offence requires that they somehow have access to people's personal emails attached to those vehicles. That is pie in the sky. I am surprised members on the other side of the Chamber have suggested that solution. The solution is to issue a fine at the time of the offence. Obviously there is a concern about rangers who issue fines. That is why a provision has been included so that if there is any risk, rangers may record that and provide the details later on as part of their protection. People are far too aggressive towards rangers, who are just doing their job. That is why parking rangers and a range of other frontline service workers were included in special laws to protect them from assault.

The reality is that parking rangers who issue tickets are just doing their jobs. People who receive tickets and assault rangers must remember that those rangers will suffer because of their actions. My office is inundated by people who tell us about the shortage of parking in the area. People park across other people's driveways. It is extraordinarily stressful for a little old lady to come home with her shopping to find that she cannot access her driveway and get out her shopping. It is extraordinarily stressful for a mum who is trying to get her kids to school but finds that someone has parked across her driveway. People who double-park to drop off their kids at school are stopping the whole traffic system around the school and creating chaos for every other parent who is trying to drop off their kids.

The rangers who are issuing parking tickets—and now they will issue paper tickets so people know they have received a fine—are doing that job to protect many people in our community from stress and discomfort. It does not happen on just a few occasions in my electorate; it happens quite often. That stress and discomfort is created by people who insist on ignoring the road rules and parking regulations around the State. We see everywhere houses with two, three or four cars. I am not sure that each household needs four cars, but for those that do have four cars and do not have private parking for them, what happens out on the street is we have issues with people illegally parking close to corners and in front of driveways. The reality is that as cars have gotten bigger and people have begun parking on corners, more and more accidents are occurring because there is no space for people to see the road and safely move out beyond the intersection.

The people who suffer the most in car accidents are those in smaller cars who cannot see past those bigger cars or who are hit by those bigger cars when they are driving down the road. Under the bill, the New South Wales Government will provide a very sensible measure to ensure that people know when they have been fined. People will not receive fines three or four weeks after the event. That will allow them to pay the fine or factor it into their budget. The bill also provides that rangers do not have to issue a fine if they believe they are at risk, which is a very sensible measure. Quite frankly, if people could show a little more courtesy to each other we would not need to introduce this legislation. Parents do not need to drop their child at the front gate of the school. Parents can park their car 100 metres away and walk. If everybody did that, we would not have half the congestion problems that we have in the morning.

Mr GREG WARREN (Campbelltown) (16:06): I am sincerely delighted to make a brief contribution to debate on the Fines Amendment (Parking Fines) Bill 2024.

Mr Alister Henskens: Try to control your delight.

Mr GREG WARREN: I note the commentary from the member for Wahroonga; it is always welcomed, of course. Members may ask why I am delighted to contribute to debate on the bill. It is because there is probably no‑one more experienced in this field when it comes to fines than me. I reckon I have had more than anyone in here! That is the reality of it.

Mr Alister Henskens: Don't brag about it.

Mr GREG WARREN: I have had parking fines and what have you over the years—it is terrible. But I am delighted because the legislation is about cleaning up the process. I understand the Opposition does not oppose the bill. I acknowledge and thank Opposition members for their collaboration and for ensuring that we can fix this process. I will be very brief. I assure parking rangers and others out there that there are provisions in the legislation for their protection. There is no way that any government—the former Government, any future government or, indeed, this Government—would introduce any piece of legislation to this place that would put someone in harm's way.

First, I do not believe it is the intent of any of my colleagues on either side of the House to make a decision that would jeopardise someone's safety. Secondly, Parliamentary Counsel would not let us do so anyway. It would sort that out, or it would be brought to our attention by stakeholders. I reboot that certainty and provide that assurance for rangers and anyone else who may be affected when it comes to issuing parking fines. As has been said before, the Government gave an undertaking to remove secret speeding fines and it is now removing secret parking fines quite simply because it is the right thing to do. No-one likes getting a fine, but when they do they should expect that the process is just, fair, safe and transparent. I believe this bill provides that opportunity. Ultimately, when I break it down more specifically, it will require councils to attach an on-the-spot notification to a vehicle. This could be the penalty notice itself or a short description of the offence and notice that a fine will be sent to them unless, first, it is unsafe to attach a notification, the vehicle is parked in a prescribed parking zone or the vehicle is not stationary, or the regulations permit a notification not to be attached.

The bill appropriately balances public interest considerations in respect of procedural fairness and the safety of officers. Of note, the exceptions will not require an officer to attach an on-the-spot notification or take images where they have reasonable grounds for concern for their safety. That is, by extension, the point I made earlier. Should officers rely on an exception, they will be required to make a record of why they concluded that the exception applied in the circumstances and provide their reasoning to Revenue NSW or, if requested, a person who has been fined for a parking offence.

Introduced in the legislation are data reporting rules to monitor the use of exceptions, to increase transparency for the public and assist in the evaluation of the reform, and to identify if any future reforms are necessary. An authorised officer is also required to take photographs, including photographs of parking offences and the notification attached to the vehicle. The images must be provided to Revenue NSW or to a person who has been fined for a parking offence, if requested. That will streamline the review process for any challenged fines. It will apply to all parking fines, not just ticketless fines.

Furthermore, the legislation will prohibit a fine being issued for a parking offence if a fine for the same kind of offence was issued within the previous seven days for the same vehicle in the same location and no notification was placed on the vehicle for the earlier offence. That will address a key concern about the existing system, that drivers can be fined multiple times for the same offence before they even become aware of the first infringement. It also sets out the circumstances in which noncompliance with the proposed requirements will invalidate a fine—for instance, where there is a failure to take photographs and to leave a notification, or a failure to issue a penalty notice within seven days if no notification was provided.

The requirement to issue an on-the-spot notification will not apply to a limited number of parking zones, such as enclosed parking areas that use licence plate recognition technology and national parks with limited mobile phone connectivity. Regulations issued by the Minister for Finance will clearly specify the parking zones and describe the wording, font size, colour and location of signage to give drivers sufficient advance warning that they are in a ticketless infringement zone. In addition, councils will be required to publish data about the number of parking fines issued, including the number of fines where an on-the-spot notification was not provided. That data will then be used to monitor the implementation of the reforms and evaluate any further changes required.

The reality is, as with any piece of legislation, it can always be amended, tested and adjusted. The Government feels—and certainly I do feel—that this bill has found the balance in addressing the issues that have stood for a long time. When I say "a long time", I reflect back on the previous Government, which introduced the ticketless parking fine system, also known as Print and Post, in May 2020. It allowed councils and other agencies to issue parking fines without giving drivers immediate notification. This bill addresses that and puts fairness back into the process.

Historically, the usual practice of councils and other issuing authorities was to issue the penalty notice on the spot. However, over time, the number of ticketless parking fines issued by post has risen dramatically. In a single year, the number of ticketless parking fines issued by councils increased by 49 per cent on the previous year, from 551,441 issued in 2022-23 to 822,310 ticketless parking fines in 2023-24. That resulted in a 54 per cent increase in the dollar value of ticketless parking fines collected by councils in New South Wales. A further breakdown is available.

In March 2024 Minister Houssos wrote to all 128 councils urging those that use ticketless parking fines to address shortcomings in their approach. There are two overriding concerns: a lack of transparency for drivers and a lack of fairness. The bill addresses those two key factors. Under the current system, drivers do not know, when they park, if they are at risk of getting a fine in the mail two weeks later. Secondly, the impact of the fine is reduced. It does not act as a deterrent or influence behaviour. It ultimately becomes a form of revenue raising rather than doing what a fine or any infringement process is designed to do: remedy an unlawful practice. We need to make sure that whatever process we have in place to remedy the behaviour and conduct of others ultimately shows them the correct way to go. I commend the bill to the House and thank all my colleagues for their contributions.

Mr DAVID MEHAN (The Entrance) (16:16): On behalf of Mr Michael Daley: In reply: I thank all members—I think there were 12 in all—who contributed to the debate on the Fines Amendment (Parking Fines) Bill 2024. The bill introduces practical reforms to the current parking fine system to create a fairer and more accountable process that meets community expectations in New South Wales. We need to ensure that people are immediately notified of a parking offence. If they do not get that notification, there needs to be a good reason for why they did not receive it. At the outset I note the comments made by Opposition members as to the motivation behind drafting and bringing the bill to the House. I note that any historical revisionism that attributes the changes to anything other than common sense, fairness and transparency is cynical at best and offensive at worst.

Ticketless parking fines were introduced in 2020 by the previous Government. There has been an exponential increase in fines issued since that time. Peter Khoury from the NRMA, Australia's peak motoring body, said about the current system, that since some councils began introducing the ticketless parking fine system four years ago, it was clear the system was broken and needed to be fixed. For this reason, he said, the NRMA commends the New South Wales Government on today's announcement. Khoury also said that ticketless parking fines leave motorists in the dark and rob them of the chance to contest their fine if they believe they have a legitimate case. He said that the NRMA has been against the approach from day one and that the bill ends that situation and addresses the problem squarely.

I now turn to the issues raised by members during the debate. The member for Miranda noted that the term "unsafe", or "not safe", used in the legislation was not defined. I do note that a working group has been set up to examine all the definitions needed under the provisions of the Act at section 24A, which require detailed reasons to be given when an enforcement officer declines to issue a parking notice on the spot due to the circumstances of the issuing, in that officer's view, not being safe. The working group will work through that. Section 24A requires detailed reasons to be provided if that exception is used. Then the member for Miranda got down into the parking bay gutter, so to speak. In response to her comments, I refer to my previous comments about the motivations behind the bill. Despite her tremendous misgivings about the bill, I note she has indicated she supports it. I am not sure how deeply held those misgivings are.

The member for Granville noted the number of fines issued in her area and the use of technology by councils to ramp up the fine process and how that has contributed to the unfair current system introduced by the former Liberal-Nationals Government. The member for South Coast noted the lack of procedural fairness in the current system. The member for Liverpool pointed to the previous Government's changes as being the root cause of creating an unfair system, which undermined the faith of many of her constituents in our legal system. The member for Mount Druitt said that the changes were essential to rebuilding the community's confidence in our justice system in New South Wales. The member for East Hills noted that the Minister had already written to councils about the Government's concerns with the system and how it was being used by councils, and due to the lack of response from local government, it was necessary to introduce the bill.

The member for Parramatta explained why speed cameras are not covered by the bill. I will make some further comments on that. The member for Newtown, in a way in which only the member for Newtown can, explained the challenges of inner-city living. She noted that the former Government's system incentivised councils to impose productivity demands on their workers, which contributed to an unfair work environment and an unfair legal system. I hope we all remember her important point about the unfairness of a fine in relation to a person's income. I support her comment 100 per cent. It would be great if the Government during its time in this House could try to make the issuing of a fine better related to a person's income. That would be a great reform in this State.

The member for Gosford reminded us that nobody—especially those living on the Central Coast—likes getting a fine. She noted that her local council had tried to replace some of its lost revenue with fines revenue as a result of changes introduced by the former Government. The member for Goulburn asked why speeding fines were excluded. There is a big difference in both the gravity and the risk to the public between speeding and illegal parking. Parking for 30 minutes more than the limit and speeding in a school zone are two different situations. We are talking about moving vehicles. It is very difficult to attach a speeding notice to a moving vehicle, which I am sure after a moment's reflection the member for Goulburn would understand. It should also be noted that there is a level of judgement applied by parking officers when issuing parking fines, whereas the use of fixed speed and red light cameras is a technical response that provides a decision-making and fine-issuing process that is more streamlined.

The member for Auburn noted that council amalgamations incentivised many councils to try to replace some of their lost revenue with fines revenue due to their lack of revenue-collecting ability after amalgamation. The member for the great city of Campbelltown ended the debate as only he can, by reminding us of how the previous Government's system affected working people throughout the State. I thank all members for their contributions. The New South Wales Government looks forward to working with all stakeholders to continue to roll out these reforms. As I indicated, a number of working groups will be set up to inform the regulations and to inform the ongoing process we follow as we make the system of law enforcement in this State a fairer one for all of our citizens. I commend the bill to the House.

The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Mr Jason Li): The question is that this bill be now read a second time.

Motion agreed to.

Third Reading

Mr DAVID MEHAN: On behalf of Mr Michael Daley: I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Motion agreed to.