Page 935 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 17 June 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
MR MOORE (11.53): I would like to thank the Government for raising this issue. It assists in protecting not only people undertaking study but also people like doctors who volunteer to assist in epidemiological studies. It is quite common, particularly if a case control study is used, for a researcher to go to a medical practitioner and seek access to information from the general files of the people involved. The immediate reaction to this situation is that such information ought not be allowed to be available broadly. In fact, clause 4 of the Bill ensures that that is not the case. There is a quite severe penalty - $5,000 or imprisonment for 12 months. This amendment does protect a doctor who is prepared to allow information like that to be used in a study so that the community as a whole can have an understanding of a particular disease or the potential for an epidemic. I think this is a very positive contribution to the Bill. I think it enhances it significantly.
Proposed new clause agreed to.
Remainder of Bill, by leave, taken as a whole, and agreed to.
Bill, as amended, agreed to.
MOTOR TRAFFIC (AMENDMENT) BILL 1992
Debate resumed from 13 May 1992, on motion by Mr Westende:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
MR CONNOLLY (Attorney-General, Minister for Housing and Community Services and Minister for Urban Services) (11.55): The Government has certainly shown in the few short weeks that the Second Assembly has been in session that we are prepared to take an open and cooperative approach to private members' business. We have not seen the scenes that were regular in the First Assembly, where whoever the Government was tended as a knee-jerk reaction to oppose any private members' business. We have just seen a good example with Mr Moore's Bill, where a cooperative and sensible approach was taken all round to get a reform through.
But I am bound to say that the Government will not be supporting Mr Westende's amendments here today. He deals with two propositions in this amendment Bill. The principal one relates to travelling in the left lane, the "keep left" amendment. Generally speaking, we would expect that the Government in the ACT will for many years be keeping left; the Labor Party will be in here for a long haul. But it is not necessary to introduce legislation to ensure our continued survival. The second proposal relates to extensions of time to pay traffic infringement notices. While I would acknowledge that in both cases Mr Westende raises a valid point, I cannot support his amendments; but I think we can give him some joy in at least addressing the issue.
The "keep left" amendment is familiar to people who live in larger cities. I think I recall that in one media interview Mr Westende was referring to some of the autobahns in Europe where there is an unlimited speed limit. We are talking of three-, four- or five-lane highways and a "keep left" rule makes sense there. The "keep left" rule makes some sense in Sydney or Melbourne where we have freeways with multiple lanes, in most cases three- or four-lane freeways. In the
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .