Page 3796 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 16 October 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
for. It was considered by many that it would encourage the use of drugs by virtue of its being in an area frequented by children. I am still concerned about this issue, but at least it would be possible to remind those who seek to add that form of dangerous litter to the litter stream to be aware of the proposals for increased penalties.
I also note that, in section 4 of the parent Act, a fine of $250 is provided for a person who fails to properly secure household rubbish, garden refuse or commercial waste. Anyone who travels to work on a Monday morning on the route that goes past the dump, as I do, will know that many people are failing to comply with that requirement. I hope that, when the new legislation is brought forward, the Government will make sure that heavy penalties are provided, and appropriate supervision of those areas, for those who fail to comply with their civic duty.
Might I make a comment here on a case that we heard of recently where a plastic bag, which blew off a trailer, caused a motorcyclist to lose control of the machine. Fortunately, there was not a tragedy, but such negligence could be expected to come within the provisions of this amendment.
I am sure that all members of the Assembly will support this move, and I trust, as I said before, that it will be brought forward for finalisation very quickly so that we can put some teeth into the attempt to clean up the litter in our public places. Hopefully, serious injury, disfigurement and possible disablement of an innocent victim will then be prevented. With these final sobering thoughts in mind, I commend the Bill to the house and close with my sincere thanks to those in the Parliamentary Counsel's Office who worked so hard to ensure that the Bill was ready for the last session. Unfortunately, we were unable to introduce it, for reasons beyond our control.
Debate (on motion by Mr Connolly) adjourned.
UNIT TITLES (AMENDMENT) BILL 1991
MR JENSEN (11.48): I present the Unit Titles (Amendment) Bill 1991. I move:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
This is not the first time that this legislation has been before the house. Members may recall that it was actually tabled back in 1989 and then subsequently withdrawn. This was because, at the time, we believed that the Unit Titles Act was going to undergo considerable amendment. But it would appear that the planning legislation has caused a delay in that regard, and the Rally believes that it is important for this small but very critical amendment to the Unit Titles Act to be put in place as soon as possible.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .