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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 9 Hansard (4 September) . . Page.. 3012 ..

MR WHITECROSS (continuing):

Mr Kaine seems to be very excited about consistency with New South Wales. In relation to maximum penalties we will be consistent with New South Wales. So whether you are driving in the ACT or in New South Wales you will know that for a given blood alcohol level a particular penalty, a maximum penalty, will apply. You will also know that you will have to go along and argue your case before a magistrate. The difference will be that magistrates will be able to listen to your argument and determine a penalty according to their own judgment, rather than being dictated to by the legislature as to what is the minimum penalty that they can hand out.

As I have said before, I think it would be a very rare occurrence for a magistrate to hand out a penalty below the minimums that are prescribed; but it is for the rare occurrences that we have a system of criminal justice. We have a judiciary and we have a system where each case is considered on its merits. That is the system we are trying to preserve, Mr Speaker. The fact is that there are some logical features in the Bill and that is why Labor is supporting it, but we will not be supporting the adoption of minimum penalties as some cheap macho solution to the business of sending a message to drink-drivers.

As Mr Moore rightly said, there is much more to sending a message to drink-drivers than continually ratcheting up the penalties, imposing minimum penalties, "three strikes and you are out" provisions, mandatory death sentences and whatever else Mr Kaine has in his kitbag. There is an intelligent and rational system of criminal justice under which the punishment fits the crime. We have an active system to educate people about what is right and what is wrong, in the view of the community, and to encourage people to do the right thing. We have a system of criminal justice which is working, as Mr Moore said, in the sense that, according to Superintendent Peter McDonald, the number of people who record positive tests has been falling. But we also need an appropriate criminal justice system to deal with the people who fall through the cracks. This legislation that has been proposed by the Government has an appropriate system of penalties which will be of guidance to the magistrates as to what penalties to hand out for particular offences, but it still allows the magistrates to decide what is appropriate in particular cases.

Mr Speaker, this Government endlessly wheels out the line that somehow or other the Labor Party in this Assembly must support something because the Labor Government in New South Wales supports it. Normally, they run out that argument when the Liberal Party in the ACT cannot think of an idea on their own and have borrowed one from the Labor Party in New South Wales. The reality, Mr Speaker, is that neither the Labor Party nor the Liberal Party in the ACT should automatically run out and do whatever the Liberal Party or the Labor Party in New South Wales does. We have to make up our own minds. Sometimes our colleagues in other States, whether from our party or from the other party, get it wrong. We have to make a judgment for ourselves, Mr Speaker. On this issue I happen to disagree with Bob Carr. On this issue I happen to think he is wrong. I do not believe in lots of get tough, mandatory minimum sentences - the "lock them up and throw away the key" style approaches which Bob Carr sometimes likes to wheel out in a populist attempt to look like he is doing something about a problem.

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