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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 4 Hansard (29 March) . . Page.. 1139 ..

MR HARGREAVES (continuing):

Mr Speaker, I think that it is just an assumption by the government that 16 per cent of the people are actually driving their vehicles when they are unregistered. I would suggest that that is not so. The majority of people out in our community are responsible. If they are a week late in renewing the registration of their vehicle, they are too frightened to drive the car on the road when it does not have coverage for third party insurance and is unregistered. They will leave it in the garage, catching the bus that week, and when their payday rolls around they will go and renew their registration, and on to the road they will go again. I think it is a bit rich for the minister to suggest that 16 per cent are actually rorting the system. I suggest that his assertion that these changes will address the 16 per cent who allegedly rort the system is unfounded and baseless.

As to subsequent changes to the regulations, the minister may come back and say, " I have got the solution to this. I can change the definition of a seasonal vehicle." That might be possible and it would help hobby car enthusiasts if he changed the definition of what is a hobby car. He might even, at a stretch of the imagination, change the definitions to encompass seasonal workers. If you can produce proof that you have a job somewhere or you have been posted overseas, you could get the motor registry people to approve it. But you cannot do that for the seasonal fruit-pickers, because they go in search of work. They know that they are going to get it, but they do not know for whom they are going to work until they get there. What do we want to do for those people on fixed incomes who leave the territory during our winter? Do we want them to trot along to the motor registry and produce proof of their booking at a particular hotel or retirement village interstate for six months? Do we want them to bare their soul to get released from this charge?

That brings me to the next group of persons, Mr Speaker. No change to the cosmetics of this regulation would address the financial disadvantage to be suffered by the low-income families. At this point, I would like to advise the Assembly that when Mr Rugendyke and I spoke to Mr Smyth yesterday he said, and I am going to quote him again, "I accept that this change introduces a new disadvantage." I ask: why is it necessary to make things harder for people who already struggle? This change will have no effect on those who refuse to reregister on time. They will continue to do so, and the police will continue to catch them. That, too, was admitted by the minister. He said that it would not make any difference there.

I am asking the Assembly to disallow this regulation and to retain the status quo. In doing so, Mr Speaker, I would like to foreshadow an amendment that strikes down regulation 68A, which addresses continuous registration. I would invite Mr Smyth, in his address in reply to the points I have just made, to tell us why continuous registration ought to continue. For the information of members, that relates to the situation where, if you leave your vehicle in a garage for a few months and then renew the registration, you have to backdate the amount you pay for the period the vehicle is garaged and you are not using it.

That is something new which should not be accepted. The amendment has been circulated and Mr Berry will formally move it. I may seek to speak again on the issue, with the chamber's indulgence. Mr Speaker, there is no reason for this change. The minister has said that he is introducing a new form of disadvantage. He does not need to do that. Many people will suffer if this regulation is allowed in law and we need to make

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