Page 943 - Week 04 - Wednesday, 17 June 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Of course, education is an important part of the process of getting people to change their habits; but I would respectfully suggest that you do not need to be educated to behave in a polite fashion on the roads. It seems to me that those who presently do not observe the de facto "keep to the left" rule are already behaving in a discourteous fashion and really ought to be more strongly encouraged to observe common and sensible road practices. I do, however, welcome the Government's action in this regard. I think signs will have some impact; but I predict that there will still be a problem in two years' time, after we have had these signs in place, and we will need to come back and look at this question again. I am sorry that we cannot do it today.
Some members have indicated support for the second half of this Bill. I would urge them to consider, for that reason, not voting down the whole Bill, but rather taking the Bill in two parts and voting down, if they feel so inclined, clause 3 but letting clause 4 go through. I want to indicate one of the reasons why the Opposition has moved this amendment. I was written to late last year by one resident of the Territory who was extremely concerned for his son who had just returned from university in Sydney. This young man had incurred a traffic fine - it was $70 - and had wanted to pay that money as quickly as he could. He was, as many young people in this Territory are, unfortunately, unemployed. He wrote to the police and said, "I need time to pay this; can I please have time to do so?", and he was told, "Yes, you can have the 28-day extension". He tried to raise the money in that time but was unsuccessful.
Eventually, in fact, he applied to Social Security for a benefit and through the use of that benefit got the money together in due course. Social Security is not a very fast organisation, I have to say. As a result he eventually got the money together to pay that fine. It was after the 28 days period had expired. He was told that he could not get a further extension because there was no discretion on the part of the police to give a further extension. As a result the young man had to go to court. He sent his cheque in and it was sent back by the police with a note saying, "I am sorry, we cannot accept this payment because you have exceeded the 28-day extension you had and we do not have the power to give you a further extension. We therefore have to make you go to court". What a ridiculous kind of imposition on the citizens of this Territory!
Mr Connolly: You should pay your traffic fines. You should not speed.
MR HUMPHRIES: We all make mistakes, Mr Connolly. Perhaps you have never incurred a traffic fine in your life. But I say that we all do at various times and, if we make a mistake, I think the Territory ought to have some regard for our capacity to pay in a particular time, particularly when it comes to the young unemployed of this community who perhaps are finding it much tougher than you and I are to meet this kind of social obligation. This young man wanted to do the right thing and pay his fine, but he could not do so within the time available and he had to go to court as a result.
The fact of life is that we ought to be able to give a discretion to our police. If they already have one discretion to grant 28 days, why should they not have the capacity to grant a second extension of 28 days or some other period?
Mr Connolly: That is better than the original proposal. You are starting to make more sense.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .