Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1996 Week 14 Hansard (11 December) . . Page.. 4745 ..

MS HORODNY (continuing):

As the Bill now stands, we believe the rules on truck parking represent little change from the status quo and could, in fact, lead to even greater uncertainty and disharmony among the truck industry and residents. Firstly, there are absolute bans on only a very limited range of trucks, that is, the stock trucks and the semitrailer pantechnicons, and these are not often found in residential areas anyway. It seems that that would cover about 50 trucks altogether, which is only a fraction of the 1,500 or so heavy trucks in Canberra that we are concerned about.

Under the Bill, many of the rules affecting those trucks that are not banned absolutely are not actually set in legislation but will be incorporated into a code of practice. The Government's new rules on such issues as hours of truck operation and where the truck can be parked on the block will be contained in the code. These rules do not appear to us to be particularly onerous, but they may affect some trucks and could be better than nothing. However, existing operators can seek exemptions from this code, and this is where the uncertainty begins. Truck operators will have to apply for an existing operator's certificate and then apply to the Registrar of Motor Vehicles for an exemption from the code. Under the Bill, this application will be sent to the neighbours of the truck operator, who will have the opportunity to object to the exemption.

From the truck operator's point of view, there will be uncertainty over whether they can get an exemption. If they can, they will be lucky, as they can continue to impose on their neighbours. If they cannot, they will have to find alternative parking arrangements. They will then be competing for business with other truck operators who have been able to squeeze around the rules or get an exemption. The trucking industry will therefore be split between those who can park their trucks at home and those who have to park elsewhere.

From the neighbours' point of view, if they want to get rid of the truck next-door, they will have to be prepared for a long personal and legal battle. They will have to lodge an objection with the registrar, if the neighbouring truck driver wants an exemption from the rules, and then take it through the AAT if they want to appeal, although the Bill is unclear as to whether residents have a right of appeal. If their appeal fails and the truck driver gets the exemption, it will be up to the neighbours to complain if the truck driver is not conforming with the exemption or other aspects of the rules.

The whole process puts residents in a confrontational situation with neighbouring truck operators, and for a lot of people this would be very stressful. We know already that many people are putting up with the nuisance caused by neighbouring trucks because of the fear of causing a scene and being faced with reprisals. We are therefore concerned that the Bill, as currently structured, does not make it easy for residents to come forward with their complaints. The Bill puts the onus on residents to object, when really the onus should be on truck operators to justify why they should be allowed to park in residential areas in the first place. Why should trucks have such a high priority over residents in a city that is supposed to be carefully planned to maintain a high standard of urban amenity?

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .