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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 9 Hansard (31 August) . . Page.. 2631 ..

MR BERRY (continuing):

Mr Smyth also made great play of how members of this Assembly might feel towards the victims of speeding incidents. It is true that people are the victims of accidents caused by speeding drivers who have not been caught. But if that is really the case, I wonder how Mr Smyth has been feeling about getting up in the morning every since he has been in this Assembly because he has done nothing about those speeding drivers out there in the road network. I think that the amnesty idea is a good way to assist in the introduction of these cameras and to show a bit of goodwill to the community. I am not surprised that Mr Smyth does not want to show any goodwill because it seems, as I suspected, that it is being put in place more as a revenue-raising device than for any other purpose, though there is probably a bit of fashion involved in it as well.

I would be happy to make a judgment on the effectiveness of these cameras at the end of two years on the basis of evidence that turns up in the ACT - not doctored evidence; real numbers for the ACT. One of the things that have been missing from the debate in this chamber is a discussion about those figures. Today is the first time, I think, that an attempt has been made at establishing a comprehensive set of numbers. I think there is more to it than that.

Mr Stanhope just drew attention to the questions which were asked by the NRMA and the amount of faith that has been put into them as a measure for the introduction of these cameras. I wonder whether the 60 people were asked straight out, "Would you like to be under camera surveillance as you drove to work each day?". I think the answer to that would be a comprehensive: "I do not think so". It always goes to the questions that are asked.

This is a touchy issue with the community and, if handled badly, will create a lot of bad will and antipathy towards these sorts of speed-reducing measures. I am happy to support the proposal by Mr Osborne for a two-year amnesty because it will be incumbent upon us then to sit down and examine the figures as they apply to the ACT. I look forward to that opportunity. I think the idea of having an amnesty would be worth while in the scheme of things. At least it would show some goodwill to those motorists who are going to be subject to these sorts of detection devices.

Amendment negatived.

Amendment (by Mr Osborne ) put:

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