Page 6147 - Week 19 - Tuesday, 17 December 1991
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
very well in relation to the collection of traffic fines, which really, I think, any sensible person would agree, are far more serious than mere parking matters. So, we think this legislation is most appropriate. Other speakers have spoken of a few potential problems with it, but I think we will see a vast increase in the number of traffic fines paid and a rationalisation of that particular system.
MR JENSEN (10.55): Very briefly, I think I have raised in the house before the matter of the provision of some form of notice to the hand of the person who is about to have his or her licence cancelled because of the non-payment of a parking fine. I have been given all sorts of arguments about the considerable cost associated with that. But might I suggest that there are also possible costs associated with people being unaware, for a number of reasons, that their licences have been cancelled. I think we need to look very carefully at that, and maybe the next Assembly needs to look at the possibility of some form of requirement for a notice to be hand delivered to the person who is about to have his or her licence cancelled, because of the problems associated with cancellation of licences, which my colleague Mr Collaery has already mentioned.
I do not think it is just a simple matter of saying, "But we sent them a notice", and everything in the garden is rosy. We have absolved everyone from our responsibilities; but I do not believe that it is as simple as that, because there are a lot of occasions, as my colleagues in the house have already mentioned, when people are not aware of the issuing of a parking fine and because, as often happens, they may be out of the country or even out of the city for a reasonable period, they are not aware of the fact that their licences have been cancelled. I think there should be some formal process whereby, if a licence is to be cancelled, every attempt should be made to ensure that the person is fully aware of it.
MR STEVENSON (10.57): We have surveyed the principle of cancelling registrations and licences with people in Canberra, and the majority agree with the principle. A number of problems have been caused by people not having been aware of the cancellation of their registrations. The problem is not with third-party insurance; it is with property damage. If a person drives without insurance and runs into a vehicle, the property damage is not covered. If someone is injured, that person is covered, even though the registration has been cancelled.
I brought up this and many other points during the debate when the principle was first introduced into the Assembly, perhaps last year. Unfortunately, as I recollect, I did not receive much support then. But I could clearly see any number of situations, which people have now raised in this house, in which it is possible for someone to have, totally without his or her knowledge, registration cancelled. I see Mr Collaery nodding. As I said, I recall that, when I brought up the matter previously, I did not get much
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .