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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 9 Hansard (3 September) . . Page.. 2788 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

of work I have done to support ordinary people in lots of ways in planning matters, such as gutters, that affect the way they live. I am also now in a position to table this legislation, which is about ensuring that the police can operate in an effective way in Canberra and that when they are operating in an effective way ordinary citizens have a right of appeal.

This legislation, originally introduced in 1993, was the subject of a report of the Standing Committee on Legal Affairs presented in May 1993. My recollection is that it was Mr Humphries's first report as chair of a standing committee. It was a quite sensible report. It supported the concept of the legislation but called for some further action. I believe the Attorney-General has had time to put in place the sorts of actions he called for. That is why I have reintroduced the legislation - to make sure that the recommendations he made as chair of that committee are now put into practice.

The matters that are subject to an expiation notice - in other words, the matters that are dealt with in this legislation - are matters that are currently in the Crimes Act, with the exception of drinking in public places, which comes under section 84 of the Liquor Act. The offences in respect of which I am proposing that the police at least ought to have the choice about issuing expiation notices are: Misbehaviour at public meetings, possession of an offensive weapon, fighting, offensive behaviour, noise abatement offences, public mischief and drinking in public places. Members might immediately say, "But I do not think that a police officer should be able, for example, to deal with possession of offensive weapons by an expiation notice when somebody is carrying a machine gun". Of course, the important point about this legislation is that it would allow the police officer the choice to use his discretion to decide when it is appropriate to apply an expiation notice and when it is not. This takes us to the matter of choice. Under this legislation the police officer does indeed have a choice at any point of whether to proceed in the current manner or to issue an expiation notice. That means that the police officer will be taking action then and there at the time and dealing with the issues.

There is a choice for the police officer, but there is also a choice for the individual. The offender who is given an expiation notice will have a choice to pay the $100 and say, "That will be the end of the matter. I have learnt a lesson. It is a good rap over the knuckles". That individual can also say, "But I think the police officer's action was entirely inappropriate. I ought not to have this fine. Therefore, I am not going to pay it. I will exercise my choice to appeal the matter and take the matter before the Magistrates Court or the appropriate court". It would normally be the Magistrates Court. This is an appropriate way to operate. It meets the criteria of civil liberties, the sorts of criteria that are not met by police move-on powers. As such, I believe it makes a sensible alternative to move-on powers. It adds to the armoury of the police officer another choice in the way that he or she can deal with street offences.

The next part of this legislation is about keeping police on the beat. At the moment, for any of these offences, it would normally take two police officers to take someone to the station in order to charge them. We can imagine the situation in cases of offensive behaviour, fighting and drinking in a public place, and causing a problem outside a nightclub in the evening. The police would have a choice, and people would learn very quickly that a police officer has the power to walk around the five or six people there and issue an expiation notice. The individual is then going to have to come up with $100 or

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