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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 14 Hansard (11 December) . . Page.. 5020 ..

MR SPEAKER: He will have to get leave, Ms Tucker. This is not a Christmas party.

MS TUCKER: It appears that Mr Kaine does not want leave, so I will just have to listen to Mr Whitecross, though they might imagine that it is a Christmas party.

Mr Moore: The rest of us are enjoying it.

MS TUCKER: I am just speaking about the issue.

MR SPEAKER: You are. The others are interjecting, Ms Tucker. Please continue.

MS TUCKER: Protect me, Mr Speaker. Obviously there are some difficulties. Mr Whitecross has rightly pointed out that this is slightly dubious in terms of law enforcement. The Greens were not prepared to support sentencing being influenced by prevalence. We believed that that was not just. You could equally argue that it is not just to change a penalty because of the time of year. On the other hand, we are interested in public safety. Mr Kaine has claimed that in a particularly high-risk period this will reduce some of the accidents that can occur. Mr Kaine says that he has spoken as much as he wishes to speak, but I would like to know how much promotion would be given to this. What sort of evaluation would there be? I am interested in the possibility of seeing it as a trial. Of course, the Liberals would not support the 50-kilometre-an-hour trial, which is really disappointing.

Mr Moore: What would the 50-kilometre-an-hour trial do?

MS TUCKER: It was about reducing injury on the road, but we did not get cooperation from the Liberals on that one. I would be interested to hear Mr Kaine address those particular matters about promotion and evaluation. I can see some merit in this being a trial in the interests of public safety on the roads.

MR WHITECROSS (9.27), in reply: I am sorry that you have not enjoyed the debate, Mr Speaker. I think it is an important debate.

Ms McRae: And it is the last time he will be in here.

MR WHITECROSS: So you say. The debate raises an important issue of principle. I think all members in this place recognise the importance of road safety measures and appropriate motor traffic laws to set standards of behaviour on the roads. We have an extensive Motor Traffic Act which is designed to do just that and we have an extensive schedule of penalties for offences under that Act. More than 150 penalties are mentioned in the Motor Traffic Act and the Motor Traffic (Alcohol and Drugs) Act. Yet this Government is making regulations which override considered decisions about appropriate penalties for particular offences by arbitrarily deciding that on a particular day of the year a higher penalty should apply. That is what this debate is about. It is about whether penalties are going to be decided in a considered way according to the nature of the offences or whether the Minister can, at his whim, decide that a different penalty should apply on a particular day of the year.

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