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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 9 Hansard (4 September) . . Page.. 3029 ..

Debate resumed from 19 June 1997, on motion by Mr Kaine:

That this Bill be agreed to in principle.

MR WHITECROSS (10.19): Pardon me for sneezing, Mr Speaker.

MR SPEAKER: Bless you!

MR WHITECROSS: Thank you, Mr Speaker. It is not often that I get a blessing from the Speaker.

MR SPEAKER: Particularly by me.

MR WHITECROSS: I take them when I can, Mr Speaker.

The Motor Traffic (Amendment) Bill (No. 3) 1997 makes provision for private inspectors to be engaged in vehicle inspections. The process, I guess, is one of the first opportunities presented by Government legislation to actually debate the Government's vehicle testing system. In the detail stage I will be moving some amendments to implement what I believe would be a more appropriate system of vehicle testing than the one that has been introduced by the Government.

Mr Speaker, the issue of annual vehicle inspection is a matter of public safety. It is an issue which the Government should be involved in and it is an issue on which the Government should be setting the standards and on which governments historically have set standards. As discussed in earlier debates, driver behaviour and driver attitude are significant elements in motor safety. Some of the legislation we have passed already deals with some of the issues of motor safety, whether it is dangerous driving or driving under the influence. But, Mr Speaker, the issue of vehicle safety is still an important issue. Prior to the election of this Liberal Government, the ACT had the best vehicle inspection system in the country. We now have the worst. There is an abundance of evidence which shows that, in jurisdictions that do not have any vehicle inspections, the vehicle fleet is often in a state of disrepair.

Mr Speaker, let there be no doubt that the Government's motivation in changing the vehicle inspection system in the ACT was not road safety. It was not best practice. The motivation was money. That was the motivation which was usually at the heart of most things that the then Minister, Mr De Domenico, did, because policy issues and policy analysis tended to elude him. When asked to explain why he had done things, his usual answer was, "I made a decision because that is what I am here to do - make decisions". He was never much good at explaining why he had made a decision, Mr Speaker. Usually, when you actually looked at it, at the end of the day, it was about delivering for the Government some savings for its budget. It had nothing to do with policy; it had nothing to do with what was in the interests of public safety; it was to do with money.

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