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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 14 Hansard (11 December) . . Page.. 5015 ..

MR KAINE (continuing):

having lost friends or relatives because drunken or stupid drivers think that they can get away with it. I assert that they should not be allowed to get away with it. What we are doing is a very responsible thing to do. I hope that crossbench members are not going to be persuaded by this gimmick dragged on by the Labor Party at the last minute but will think seriously about the issues here.

This is not fun. This is not just a game. We are talking about people's lives and people's safety. I can only ask people on the crossbenches not to fall for this. It is a stupid trick brought on by Mr Whitecross. I take the matter seriously and I send a signal very forcefully to people: "If you drink and drive over Christmas, you will cop it. If you drive at excessive speeds over Christmas, you will cop it". I have no reservations about this whatsoever. Mr Whitecross, I think that you ought to get your mind back into gear instead of leaving it in neutral.

MR WOOD (9.05): Mr Speaker, I refute the claims that Mr Kaine made about Mr Whitecross and the Opposition dragging this up at the last minute, bringing it up out of the blue. For heaven's sake, the regulation was tabled only a few hours ago. This has happened one time before. That was on the October long weekend and we were not advised - - -

Mr Stefaniak: It worked very well.

MR WOOD: I am not sure that it did work very well. We were only advised by notice in the newspaper on that occasion. We did not have a chance to debate it here. This is the first real opportunity we have had to debate the proposal that you put forward. I want to make only one comment. On the October weekend, when double demerit points were announced and enforced, there were no police from the traffic squads out on the roads. We were talking about heavy enforcement and double demerit points, saying, "We are really watching you, folks", but the police were not out there to do it.

The response I got at the time was: "There are police routinely on duty and they will cover any speeding and the like". I was unkind enough at the time to say that it was administration by bluff. I hinted that it was a deliberate measure to save money on police by trying to bluff the ACT community. On calmer reflection, I might not make that claim, because two quite different departments were involved and I do not think there would be that sort of contact between them. If the Minister wins this case tonight, he should tell us publicly whether police from the traffic squad will be out there to police it. That was not the case last time. That must throw some doubt on the seriousness of what the Government is about.

MR STEFANIAK (Minister for Education and Training) (9.08): I am amazed that the Opposition are opposing these regulations. As Mr Kaine has said, they did go through the Scrutiny of Bills Committee. That committee's report No. 19 of 1997, under the heading "Subordinate Legislation - No Comment", states:

The Committee has examined the following subordinate legislation and offers no comment:

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