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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 4 Hansard (8 May) . . Page.. 1124 ..

MR WHITECROSS (continuing):

There is one other thing I should say in relation to this matter. Why is this before us at all? The first proposal that came to me for an inquiry into this matter came from a representative of the Cyclists' Rights Action Group who had been to see Mrs Carnell at a Meet the Minister meeting. At that Meet the Minister meeting they said, "We want you to repeal this cycle helmet law". Mrs Carnell replied in the normal way, passing the buck. She was not going to say no to anybody. So what did Mrs Carnell do? She said, "I would support an inquiry into it". Never mind that there is no evidence that cycle helmets are bad for you; never mind that there is no case. The Health Minister says, "I do not want to say no to them. We will have an Assembly inquiry and they can say no. Then I will be able to say to the Cyclists' Rights Action Group, `Do not blame me. It was the nasty Assembly committee that said no, not me'. Do not blame me". Mr Speaker, I think that is a pretty pathetic approach, a pretty pathetic lack of leadership on what I think is an important community safety issue.

I believe that we ought to be rejecting this inquiry. I and my Labor colleagues will support an inquiry into this matter when evidence is brought forward that wearing cycle helmets is bad for you, but that evidence does not exist. I am not going to buy that last refuge argument - that we know it is bad for us, but we have a civil right to do it.

MR SPEAKER: Order! It being 45 minutes after the commencement of Assembly business, the debate is interrupted in accordance with standing order 77.

Motion (by Mr Berry) agreed to:

That the time allotted to Assembly business be extended by 30 minutes.

MR OSBORNE (11.45): I will be speaking to Ms Tucker's amendment, Mr Speaker. I had a discussion with Ms Tucker about this. I am very reluctant to take it on board, given my own feelings about the issue. I have also spoken to Mr Wood, another member of the committee, and he is reluctant to take it on as well. I thought I would rise to let you know that I will not be supporting this issue going to the Legal Affairs Committee.

On the issue of it going to Ms Tucker's committee, during my time here I have never forced an issue on a committee when the chair has not been in favour of taking it on board.

Mr Moore: That is a bad precedent.

MR OSBORNE: Mr Moore says that it is a bad precedent, but I think it is a fair one. If Ms Tucker does not wish to take it on board in the Social Policy Committee, I will not force her to do it. As chair of the Legal Affairs Committee, I will not be taking it on board.

MR HUMPHRIES (Attorney-General) (11.46): Mr Speaker, I indicated when this legislation came up in 1992 that I accepted that there was at least a strong prima facie case for the introduction of the compulsory wearing of bicycle helmets, but I expressed at the time reservations I had about some elements of the proposal. I also noted, I think, that there was an element of compulsion in the process of bringing this legislation forward

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