Page 2725 - Week 13 - Tuesday, 21 November 1989
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR MOORE (3.39): I am quite happy to support Mr Collaery's amendment and withdraw my proposed amendment because they achieve the same goal, and that is all I am interested in doing. I really must take the Chief Minister's point; yes, it will reassure members of the Assembly if this is included in the Bill.
It seems to me that a police officer on the job can go to and use this particular Bill and look at that and work from that. When it gets to court it may be that the court throws it out. In the meantime our police officers, competent as they are in all aspects of their duty, are not actually lawyers, even though they are legal professionals. It seems to me that we risk a situation in which a police officer can in effect use this power for asking the name and address and then say, "Oh, well, I got it wrong", after the situation has already happened. I would certainly feel much more secure if this amendment were included. I appreciate the Government's willingness to include it.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause, as amended, agreed to.
Remainder of Bill, by leave, taken as a whole, and agreed to.
Bill, as amended, agreed to.
MOTOR TRAFFIC (ALCOHOL AND DRUGS) (AMENDMENT) BILL 1989
Debate resumed from 28 September 1989, on motion by Ms Follett:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
MR STEFANIAK (3.41): This Bill had its genesis, I think, in the Northern Territory, of all places, in 1978 when there was a rather nasty accident caused by some drunk who did have a blood alcohol reading taken and it was about 0.28 - in other words, he was very much affected by alcohol. I think a few people had been injured in the accident.
The case went to court but, because the blood sample had been taken from the driver of the offending vehicle while he was unconscious - I think his sample had been left on his chest in the hospital, which seems a bit strange but at any rate that was one of the peculiarities of that case - it was held that he could not have been able to accede to a demand to give a sample of his blood or refuse the demand, in which case he could have been charged with something. Accordingly, the case was thrown out of court.
Several of these cases have appeared over the last 10 years in the ACT courts. I think I was prosecuting in one or two
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .