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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 1 Hansard (16 February) . . Page.. 213 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

Similarly, Mr Speaker, one can also imagine a situation where there would be some abuse of the machines to obtain a misleading impression of a person's state of sobriety. There are dangers and weaknesses in the arrangements presented. For example, a person who used the breath testing equipment half an hour after having had their fourth or fifth drink in quick succession might be misled into thinking that they were, in fact, under the 0.05 limit and able to drive their car. Such people are very likely to find by the time they get half-way down the highway towards their home that they are, in fact, over the limit and potentially are a danger to other people and to themselves.

There are also concerns about the situation where the machines may not be properly calibrated, or are subject to fairly heavy duty use in the particular premises or are not an accurate measure of what is in the person's blood. So, Mr Speaker, in those circumstances the use that people will make of those machines represents a fairly significant decision. Undoubtedly there will be cases where the information will be used appropriately and fairly, and other situations where it will be used other than appropriately and fairly.

On balance, the Government has taken the view that the legislation is designed to encourage people to be able to test their level of sobriety. It may discourage a number of people who take the test and who are clearly over the limit according to the machines from getting behind the wheel of their car. In those circumstances there may be value in having a piece of legislation on the statute books that encourages people to measure and to take a sounding of their level of sobriety.

Having indicated the Government's support for the legislation, we have to indicate also that this will need to be monitored very carefully. Almost certainly cases will come forward where a person will say, "I took the test. I passed the test. I got behind the wheel of my car. I was picked up by police. I was measured as being over 0.05 and I'm now suffering a serious consequence because the machine was inaccurate", or whatever. At least, such claims will be made.

Obviously it is very difficult to be certain about the quality of the machines at any given point in time, except perhaps immediately after they have been installed and calibrated. These sorts of claims from people who may have been picked up for drink driving may have some foundation. On balance though, the Government's view is that it is better that people be able to take these tests and try to pace their level of consumption if there is adequate warning available to them about the way in which they conduct the test, and if there is a chance to assess the kind of impact this legislation will have on the drinking habits of people in these circumstances.

Mr Speaker, the Government has commissioned a couple of amendments to the legislation. Most of the amendments are not available as yet and I will be asking the Assembly to put over the detail stage of this Bill until they are ready. One of the amendments simply provides that there be a sunset clause of two years in this legislation. I am aware that legislation of this kind has been enacted in three other jurisdictions in Australia, under considerable pressure from the manufacturers of these devices. I want to be clear that we can see after a couple of years of operation of this

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