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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 9 Hansard (4 September) . . Page.. 3023 ..

Mr Moore: Mr Speaker, I take a point of order - - -

MR STEFANIAK: No wonder the magistrates want some guidance - - -

MR SPEAKER: Just a moment, Mr Stefaniak.

Mr Moore: Mr Speaker, standing order 54 is really very specific. I think it is appropriate for us to take great care in the way we deal with reflections on the judiciary. It is there for a very good reason. I think it is an appropriate time to remind Mr Stefaniak of that important standing order.

MR STEFANIAK: Mr Moore was not listening, Mr Speaker. I did refer to the fact, as did Mr Kaine, that the magistrates themselves and the Chief Magistrate - as is his duty and right, representing the other magistrates - were seeking guidance. They did so for very good reason, Mr Speaker. We are talking about giving people what is, in fact, a privilege, not a right. When that privilege is abused by people and they then seek to have a further privilege extended, in terms of a special licence, the courts should have - and want, it seems, in this circumstance - a number of matters whereby they can see what the intent of the legislature is and what such things as exceptional circumstances are. They themselves want that defined. They want to seek - and they have sought, it seems - the guidance of this Assembly in terms of setting out some guidelines in this very important area.

It is a very important area, Mr Speaker, because we are, effectively, dealing with people's lives. The most lethal thing I think a normal person in our society can get their hands on is a motor car. There are very good reasons why we need laws in terms of regulating traffic offences. Ninety-seven per cent of accidents occur because of driver error. I think that is just a statistical fact that people need to be aware of. When people transgress the motor traffic laws, I think we need to be very careful about extending them further privileges in terms of special licences.

What Mr Kaine is proposing here, I think, is eminently sensible. In fact, it adheres to what the courts themselves wish to see from this body - and that is guidance on behalf of the community. I also submit that it is what the community expects. We have a duty, as legislators, to protect the community, to look after the rights of the community. I think, unfortunately, what Mr Moore is proposing is something that is excessively lenient and something that our own courts, as indicated by the Chief Magistrate, do not want to see. It is not what the magistrates want to see.

What is being proposed here is eminently sensible. It represents the rights of the community and also the proper rights of the defendants themselves and the applicants for some special privileges here. What Mr Moore is proposing, I think, would entirely defeat the purpose of what this particular part of the Bill is all about and would prevent our giving what the courts are seeking from this body, which is guidance.

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