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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 9 Hansard (4 September) . . Page.. 3002 ..

MR KAINE (Minister for Urban Services) (8.55), in reply: I will be closing the in-principle debate, Mr Speaker.

MR SPEAKER: Indeed, you will be closing the in-principle debate, Mr Kaine.

Mr Whitecross: We have already spoken, Mr Speaker.

MR SPEAKER: Yes, I am aware of that.

Mr Whitecross: I am just clarifying that.

MR SPEAKER: Mr Whitecross has spoken.

MR KAINE: Mr Speaker, it is pleasing to note the general support for the intent of these two Bills. I know that we have some differences of opinion about the detail and that we will be debating those shortly, but the important thing here is that the Government has set about a range of actions to reduce the trauma on our roads. We have introduced a system of competency-based driver training. In conjunction with the NRMA, we have gone into a program to make people aware of the need for proper behaviour on roads - an awareness program to make people aware of their responsibilities when they are out there. Later this evening we will be dealing with the question of the inspection of motor vehicles, which is, in statistical terms, a minor part of the problem; but the matters dealt with in these two Bills are a major part of the problem. Ninety-five per cent of road accidents in the ACT are caused by drink-driving or by excessive speed; in other words, simply by bad driver attitudes - either a failure to understand responsibilities or a deliberate dismissal of those responsibilities.

What the Government has sought to do with these two Bills in particular is to bring home to people the penalty for driving when they have been drinking or driving recklessly and without regard for other users of the road. Essentially, the Motor Traffic (Alcohol and Drugs) (Amendment) Bill is to provide a greater deterrent to drink-driving and to irresponsible driving than we have had in place before. We propose to do this, first of all, by changing the way the courts apply penalties, particularly for drink-driving, and by toughening up the law so far as it relates to people appearing before the courts for repeat and high-level drink-driving offences. We have provided the ability for people in some cases to get a special licence if they can establish good cause. We have not sought to increase the financial fines, however. We believe that the regime of fines currently in place is appropriate for the time being. What we have done is substantially increase the penalty provisions in terms of cancellation of licence for culpable driving. The Government is of the view that, if you make the penalties for culpable driving more severe and if you make it more difficult for people to get licences back after they have lost their licence for reckless or irresponsible driving, it will certainly bring home to them that it is not a matter that is regarded lightly by the community.

In so far as drink-driving is concerned, the bottom line of this legislation was to make it clear to people that if they drink and drive they lose their right to drive. I want to dwell on that point for a minute. The message that we do not want to send is that if you drink and drive you lose your licence, you walk out the front door of the court, you walk around the back and you make application for a special licence and you get

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