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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 1 Hansard (8 December) . . Page.. 3981 ..

MR STANHOPE (continuing):

To provide this hierarchy from the bottom, to promote what was, in effect, dangerous driving over and above culpable driving, driving at speed whilst drunk or driving in a dangerous and reckless manner causing death, we now have a situation in which a young kid doing a wheel spin will suffer a greater penalty than a drunkard who causes death or injury through reckless driving. That is simply wrong. It is the wrong approach to punishment, it is the wrong approach to the dispensation of justice and it is wrong in a road traffic strategy that we start at the bottom, that we punish the transgressors that we regard as not actually participating in the most dangerous or the most heinous form of conduct more than we punish those who do the most outrageous things on our roads.

A drunk driver who caused a death would not necessarily suffer the same level of punishment as an 18-year-old kid doing a wheel spin on some back street and causing, in that instance, no damage or no injury. That is simply wrong. It is a wrong-headed approach to punishment. It is a wrong-headed approach to the administration of justice. Let us not kid ourselves about this matter. We are singling out a perceived group of offenders, namely, young men. We are, basically, making scapegoats of a group of offenders for the sake of appearance, for the sake of showing that we are really serious about this matter, that we are tough on law and order, that we will crack down on these young thugs, and that we will clean up our road problems.

This approach will not do that. This is not a road safety strategy; this is classic scapegoating of an identifiable group of offenders, namely, young macho men who are proud of their hotted-up cars. We are pointing the finger at them and saying that they are the group that is dangerous on the roads. We take the focus off the middle-aged wealthy lawyer, public servant or politician who drives home drunk as the main cause of concern on our roads and we put the focus on young kids, all as part of a design to make us look tough. It is part of the inexorable move to the right which I was amused to hear Mr Moore talking about yesterday.

Mr Moore, who basically provides the cement that holds together this right-wing Government, was out bleating and lamenting the fact that the Assembly has moved to the right. Mr Moore might just have a little bit of a think about his role in cementing together this right-wing coalition that now holds sway in this Assembly. Mr Moore is an intrinsic part of the cement that binds this right-wing coalition together and I find it amusing in the extreme to see Mr Moore out there beating his breast about what a pity and what a shame it is that we have moved to the right to the extent and to the degree we have. Mr Moore holds this right-wing coalition together; let there be no mistake about that.

MR SPEAKER: Relevance, Mr Stanhope.

MR STANHOPE: It is relevant to the stand and the posturing of Mr Moore on this issue. We have here what may be, on behalf of Mr Rugendyke, a right-headed attempt to do something about serious traffic problems that we have in Canberra. We do have a cultural problem in relation to the way the roads are used. I do not denigrate Mr Rugendyke's honest attempts at trying to do something about the poor traffic culture that we do have. But this approach is simply wrong-headed, Mr Rugendyke. I think your motives are fine. I think your approach is simply wrong. I think that it is the wrong approach to a serious problem. It is a problem that we all think is extremely serious.

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