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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 14 Hansard (11 December) . . Page.. 5026 ..

MR OSBORNE (continuing):

I am happy to give an undertaking to the Greens to look at this week over Christmas and the weekend in January as nothing more than a trial. When we come back we can assess the information and see whether it was worth the effort. When we come back there will still be room to move disallowance. There will still be enough sitting days. I do not think that this is going to be the whole answer - there is no one answer - but it is worth a try. If we do not do it, we are going to send a terrible message. What are the downsides if we do it? There are not many. If we do it, we could save lives. It is worth the effort to trial it and see whether it works. I am quite happy to come back, if I come back, in the next Assembly and have a look at the police data and see whether it has been effective.

The attitude of the Labor Party on this issue has been pathetic. People are more relaxed at Christmas time. If we can make them focus a little better on their driving, then I think it is well worth the effort. Mr Whitecross has been a disgrace on police matters in the last three years. He has reared his ugly head here again.

MRS CARNELL (Chief Minister): I seek leave to speak briefly on behalf of the Government, Mr Speaker.

Leave granted.

MRS CARNELL: I agree that more data needs to be collected with regard to this trial. Some data was collected in October but it was for only one weekend. Obviously, more data needs to be collected to determine whether this does any good.

Ms McRae: Why do you not put some coppers on the road? That would help.

MRS CARNELL: I will answer that in a moment. Mr Osborne hit the nail on the head. We have one weekend of data. If we are to show whether or not this is beneficial, we need more data. As a government, we are more than willing to provide data to a new Assembly on what happens in this period. I come back to an important question. What harm can be done by allowing another period when we use double demerit points?

Those opposite are a bit light on for consistency. We know that reintroducing annual checks for car registrations would cost something like $14m. Those opposite have told us that $14m would be worth it if we saved one life. That is an exact quote. We know that 5 per cent of accidents happen as a result of car defects. Three per cent involve tyres, so 2 per cent of accidents are a result of other defects in cars. A whole lot more accidents happen as a result of speeding. We have a chance here of saving a life. What is the cost? It is zero. We have an opportunity for no dollars, apart from promotion, to save potentially one life, and those opposite are not willing to do it. But they were willing to spend $14m to prevent potentially 2 per cent of accidents. Mr Speaker, the consistency - - -

Mr Whitecross: It is down to 2 per cent now, is it?

MRS CARNELL: No, it is 5 per cent - 3 per cent tyres and 2 per cent other defects. They are NRMA figures. Today the police launched the Christmas road safety campaign. They do have a road safety campaign over Christmas. More police are on the road over Christmas. There is a significant public relations campaign promoting road safety over Christmas. The double demerit points are part of the road safety campaign.

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