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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 4 Hansard (8 May) . . Page.. 1125 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

which, as Mr Moore referred to before, amounted to blackmail - that is a very emotive word - and it goes too far. The Commonwealth Government was introducing legislation across the country to provide for what it saw as a tightening of rules following some rather major road accidents. It offered black spot funding to State and Territory governments if they enacted certain laws.

The argument was put at the time - I was a member of Cabinet at the time - that there ought to be acceptance of this money; that it was quite important funding and we ought to go along with the arrangements being made nationally in order to fit in with that grant of money from the Commonwealth. I forget what the figures were, but there were significant sums of money involved. I fully understand why the government of the day, the Follett Government, decided that it would accept that money.

Ms McRae: How come you were in Cabinet and she decided? You are getting a little confused.

MR HUMPHRIES: I am concertinaing the process a bit. We were looking at the early offer from the Commonwealth Government.

Ms McRae: You agreed; that is the bottom line.

MR HUMPHRIES: I do not know why the people over there are so testy about this subject. They are obviously hypersensitive about the fact that a proposal which they enacted is being questioned later in the Assembly. There have always been strong community views about this. Mr Speaker, I will put my cards on the table. I have always thought that there ought to be compulsory wearing of bicycle helmets, but I am open-minded enough to acknowledge that there are arguments the other way as well. Mr Kaine outlined the very strong reasons why it appears that there should be compulsory wearing of bicycle helmets, but I have had doubts about this and I accept that there is a basis for us to go back and look at the evidence about it.

I can advise, Mr Speaker, that we have had information from our three hospitals in the Territory. The evidence from our inpatient morbidity data covering the three hospitals in the ACT suggests that there has been no reduction in the rate of serious injury as a result of the introduction of the compulsory wearing of bicycle helmets. This was the case for children under the age of 18 and the total population. That is the information from the three hospitals.

Mr Moore: There has been no reduction.

MR HUMPHRIES: That is the evidence that is available to me. I do not know what the date of this is. I do not know how far into the trial it occurred, but that is the evidence that has come to us from the three ACT hospitals. Bear in mind that some injuries from bicycle accidents will not necessarily be showing up in the hospitals anyway. Some people might get grazes or cuts or a bit of concussion and might not turn up at the hospital. That has always been the case, so we cannot be sure. But, Mr Speaker, I think there is enough of a doubt about this matter to allow it to go to a committee.

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