Page 1842 - Week 07 - Tuesday, 22 June 2021
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
This amendment bill is about encouraging safer driver behaviour. The Canberra Liberals consulted widely in the lead-up to this debate, receiving a briefing from the office of New South Wales transport minister, Andrew Constance. The feedback from New South Wales is very clear—similar legislation in that state led to an immediate widespread change of behaviour, and it is safe to assume that we will see a corresponding change in behaviour in the ACT.
This bill introduces a radical step in the use of detection systems for proving that a vehicle operator has done the wrong thing. As I understand it, for the first time enforcement technology will be used to capture and store an image of the vehicle operator. It will also record the vehicle number plate, model, travelling direction, location and time the image was taken. So the degree of personal information acquired is a substantial increase compared with that presently captured for a speeding vehicle.
The architects of this bill are certainly aware of the implications for privacy, and in this regard the explanatory statement has gone to some length to explain the considerations taken into account to protect our rights and entitlements to privacy safeguards. The Canberra Liberals will be very keen to see that the practical application of this amendment in fact guarantees the protections to privacy of personal information. This includes the deletion of images not demonstrating a contravention and specifies that images must only show as much of the driver as is necessary to prove a contravention of mobile device usage laws.
While on the subject of people’s rights, I also note the bill creates an evidentiary default presumption of guilt with the onus on the defendant to prove their innocence. The explanatory statement refers to this as the evidentiary reverse onus of proof. I hope there will be practical guidance and assistance available for defendants to ensure they are not convicted when actually innocent. I look forward to the minister’s assurances in this area.
I also look forward to the minister’s assurances, because the scrutiny committee appears quite concerned and has dedicated four pages of discussion to privacy and human rights considerations. These include the possibility of using images for purposes other than detecting mobile phone use, the onus of proof issues regarding the defendant proving they are innocent, and further consideration to provisions relating to protection against undue limitations of privacy being relocated from the current act into associated regulations. The scrutiny committee report has drawn these broad categories of concern to the attention of the Assembly and has asked the minister to respond.
In conclusion, the Canberra Liberals support this bill but seek an assurance from the government that its introduction be preceded by a reasonable period of warning to acclimatise the community to what is coming. This would be a sensible move, in my opinion. I also suggest that, given the human right sensitivities and the potential risk of misuse of captured images, the operation of the act be reviewed in 12 or 18 months.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video