Page 5433 - Week 17 - Tuesday, 3 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
of the motor vehicle in regard to weight, passenger-carrying capacity, power, et cetera, and make a much more equitable assessment of registration fees across the board. We may then see a little equity coming into this issue, rather than flogging a group of people who are being good citizens and seeking to reduce the amount of petrol they use. What you are trying to do is the exact opposite, discouraging people from making use of an alternative form of transport.
MR STEVENSON (5.33): I do not believe that this issue is about motorcycle safety; I believe that it is simply about grabbing more taxes from the population. The Government look at where they can grab more money and, when they have targeted an area, they try to think up reasons to justify it. My experience in polling people in Canberra on various areas of huge tax increases being imposed, as the ALP is quite often wont to do, is that they do not agree with such increases. They also did not agree with the cuts on non-government schools and the cuts to police. The ALP quite often suggest that they consult with the different groups they are about to reduce money to or raise money from.
One thing that happens again and again in this Assembly is that the Labor Party say that they will consult with people, and then you find out that there was not consultation. The only time there was consultation on this issue was after the motorcycle riders held a rally outside. I believe that Rosemary Follett or one of the Labor members sent a staff member outside, who rushed out and said, "Look, we will talk to you". That was announced. The next thing I heard was that there was a meeting. Did anything happen about it? Absolutely nothing. There was no change whatsoever. I do not believe that there was the slightest suggestion that there was going to be genuine consultation; it was simply a matter of suggesting, "Look, we had better shut these blokes out there up. We do not want them saying that there has been no consultation. Let us pretend that we are going to have some".
Mr Connolly has mentioned parity with New South Wales. I think most people in this town are aware enough to know that the only time governments mention parity is when they have lower charges than someone else. At any other time they have to think up other reasons for grabbing more taxes from the taxpayer. In this case Mr Connolly tried to make the point, which was rent asunder by members of the Liberal Party and the Rally, that it was reasonable to make such huge charges.
I believe that Mr Jensen made one of the most relevant points regarding environmental factors. Indeed, that is an important thing to look at. Should we be giving incentives rather than disincentives to people to ride motorbikes or pushbikes? Mr Connolly spoke about a disincentive for large motorbikes, and yet gave not one valid reason for any disincentive. If members of the Labor Party choose to
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .