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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 4 Hansard (29 March) . . Page.. 1140 ..


MR HARGREAVES (continuing):

a decision on it today so that its introduction does not come about on the proposed date of 31 March. I commend my motion to the Assembly.

MR KAINE (11.14): I must say that I have much sympathy with Mr Hargreaves in putting forward this motion. As Mr Hargreaves has explained at some length, there are many reasons why people might not want to register their vehicles permanently and continually. One of those might have to do with whether they have the funds available at the time the registration falls due. That is one reason why people might not wish to renew their vehicle registration at a particular time. It may be because people are out of the country. Lots of people happen to work for the government out of the country. They are sent overseas as part of their duties and they can be away for a long time, but they may not want to sell their vehicle. It may be a vehicle that has been in the family for many years or a vehicle of special interest and they do not want to sell it, but they are going to be out of the country for a year or more, so they put the vehicle up on blocks and leave it there until they come back.

Under this legislation, if they do that and they come back within a specified time period and wish to renew the registration, they have to pay the registration for the period during which they have been out of the country. If they stay overseas for longer than the prescribed period because their job requires it, they have to go through the process of reregistering their vehicle altogether when they come back.

There are valid reasons why people might not want to maintain continuous registration of a motor vehicle. If that is a part of their life, they are entitled not to do so. I can understand the minister putting forward this regulation to comply with uniform legislation at the federal level, but that is not the case here. The introductory to his explanatory statement makes clear that the uniform legislation does not apply to vehicles of less than 4.5 tonnes. Most of the vehicles that we are talking about here would be far less than that. The reason it is being done, we are told, is for consistency and administrative efficiency. We are not doing so for any good and valid reason, except to make the job of people who register motor vehicles easier. I do not believe that it is a valid reason to impose this kind of punitive legislation on people who are simply going about their lives without in any way offending against the law, people who are simply doing what suits them, which they are entitled to do.

Mr Speaker, I listened with great interest to what Mr Hargreaves had to say. I think he is right in saying that this legislation is unnecessary. Sometimes we accept too readily the imposition of constraints on the freedom of people to go about their lives when there is no good reason for doing so. I think that this is a case where we ought to draw the line and say, "No, Minister, this is not a requirement for any good and valid reason." It is an imposition on people and we should, as Mr Hargreaves suggests, disallow certain parts of this regulation.

MR QUINLAN

(11.18): I want to comment briefly on this rather simplistic solution to what seems to be just a little bit of administrative work. I own a half-share of a 1966 Holden HR sedan which is rigged up to participate in the annual Variety Club bash, an event which raises money for children's charities. While I am on my feet I take the opportunity to advise the house that, come Saturday, there will be a dozen or so similar cars outside at 9.00 am, if members want to turn up and inspect them. They will be flagged off at about 10 o'clock on a bash for kids with diabetes. They will be going to


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