Page 4514 - Week 15 - Thursday, 22 November 1990
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Stevenson: He has been told that he can if he pays $200.
MR DUBY: I do not believe that he will, because the compliance plate will specify that it is a passenger vehicle.
Mr Stevenson: That is not what he was told.
MR DUBY: Well, if that is the case, why does he not do so, instead of collecting thousands of dollars worth of fines? It seems to me that he is not a very bright businessman. Anyway, if the owner wants to use loading zones, he needs to obtain a C label, a commercial label. To do that the vehicle must be a passenger vehicle.
Mr Stevenson also mentioned the fact of requiring a permit to move an unregistered vehicle in order to take it over the pit. I believe, basically, that is what we are talking about.
Mr Kaine: It is only $5.50 an hour.
MR DUBY: Exactly. There are two hours allowed where the vehicle has not been inspected. If the vehicle has been inspected, a temporary licence for up to seven days may be issued, depending on the extent of the faults that have been detected in the vehicle. A temporary licence is a permit to move an unregistered vehicle to have repairs effected. If covered by Third Party, a temporary licence is not required to return the vehicle to the Motor Registry. Frankly, I guess the bottom line is that most people are going to require only a two-hour permit to move the vehicle. I can see no real problems.
In relation to going to court, I think Mr Stevenson may well be misquoting from a document, or taking - - -
Mr Stevenson: Misquoting?
MR DUBY: No, "taking it out of context" is what I was going to say. I have seen copies of the notice, and I believe that the notice that goes out to people was one that was issued when this debate was entered into on 2 November last year. That was when debates were entered into as to whether people should lose their licence for not paying parking fees. I am sure there were examples of what the particular wording of that notice would be. If I remember correctly, the previous Minister worked that out. I notice, also, that Mr Stevenson voted in favour of the arrangements; voted in favour of the extensions, and voted in favour of the second notice going out to people. We now have the situation where it is not just one notice, as was originally proposed; it is now two notices that go out. Mr Stevenson at the time, actually, with a certain sense of - - -
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .