Page 3810 - Week 13 - Thursday, 18 October 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Detail Stage
Clause 1
MR COLLAERY (Attorney-General) (12.07): Mr Speaker, I do have something to say. I will be brief. I had to sit outside and listen to Mrs Grassby. In the first part of the Bill we are dealing with child restraints. I am reminded of the continuing requirements of all States and my colleague, Mrs Grassby, to ensure that the Australian Design Rules are extended to include as much as possible in the way of the vehicles and the installations in them. Some two or three years ago, Mr Speaker, I was involved in an inquest relating to a fire in a vehicle containing infants. I found out that the seat being used to restrain the child - the child's seat - melted around the infant. In my view, even though it complied with some Australian Design Rules, the plastic and the fittings to it did not comply with the same standards for the flammability of plastics and fittings in aircraft. Although it is very welcome that in the last few weeks the ACT Government brought into law, or gave legal statutory effect to, the Australian Design Rules, I am still very concerned about those proceedings in relation to those baby seats. I noticed afterwards that the manufacturer of those baby seats shortly afterwards started a major advertising campaign to cover those seats with lambswool covers and sell them as covered.
I have always wondered, and I am still concerned, as to whether the Australian Design Rules for vehicle installations match - with respect to flammability and smoke - those for aircraft. I trust that my colleague Mr Duby will be examining those issues. Further, in another inquest that I did in the last few years, which was stoutly defended by a well-known motor vehicle manufacturer, it turned out that the seat belt anchorage point was attached, top and bottom, to the driver's door, so that if the door opened during a roll the seat belt lengthened and the driver was ejected. The ADR allowed that vehicle on our roads. I still see that vehicle around town. In fact, it was a vehicle of that nature in which a client of mine perished, not far from this house.
I believe that the endorsement of the ADR in terms of legislative effect still requires the Federal Department of Transport and those involved with it to take active measures to bring those rules into line with those pertaining in the United States, particularly with respect to the nature of the materials used in the construction of child restraints. I believe that is extremely important. I will be addressing concerns of that nature to my
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .