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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 4 Hansard (29 March) . . Page.. 1151 ..

MR HARGREAVES (continuing):

Mr Speaker, I would also like to foreshadow a discussion later on so that the minister is not ambushed. I want to give some notice of what we are thinking about with respect to stickers. The point has been made to me repeatedly that the certificate of registration is proof of registration of a motor vehicle, not the sticker. The sending out of the sticker early therefore makes no real difference at law because it does not matter. It is not the proof of registration of the vehicle. It is just an indicator, an assist if you like, to the good police officer who, at 80 ks an hour, is trying to find out whether the guy is driving a registered motor vehicle. It is a bit difficult for the driver to hold the registration certificate up to the window and say, "Have a look at that, mate." But that is all the sticker is worth at the moment. In fact, if it is sent out early as it is now, it is not even worth that. Like with my trailer, I got the sticker a month early. If I was a bit of a goose I might have whacked it on my car straightaway, thinking that I could, because I did not read the thing properly-

Mr Moore: The one for the trailer you could put on the car. You would be a goose.

MR HARGREAVES: Yes, why not? In fact, if you read the certificate which is sent out to you, it tells you, "Do not do this before the due date," because you will be breaking the law. But not everybody reads all the fine print.

I am highlighting this situation so that this government can give some thought to it. In New South Wales I understand that the date, the imprint, is on the sticker. So a policeman going through a car park or at a stationary set of lights or anything like that can see whether or not the car is a full-on registered vehicle without having to get the owner to produce the certificate to prove it. I ask this question: if the certificate is the actual proof of registration of your motor vehicle, and the number plate gives you unique identification on the outside and the compliance plate gives you specific identification for the vehicle on the inside, the sticker has virtually no use at all, so why are we sending them out to stick them on the cars at all? Why do we need the sticker? It has no real reason for being.

Perhaps it is there because we want to copy blindly what is going on around the rest of the world. If we are going to copy something that might work, perhaps we ought to copy the idea of having the imprint on the sticker. If we had that it might be a more useful thing for people to see. I just raise that issue for people to give some thought to because I suspect, in all of this, that insufficient consultation has gone on.

I am sure that the officers behind this change are acting with pure motives. I have no quarrel with that at all. I just feel sorry for them that this is not going to occur. Well, it is not my problem; it is their problem. What would have happened if there had been proper consultation on this with all the interest groups like the MTA, the NRMA and the hobby car groups instead of having it arrive in your letterbox when your renewal happens, and that is the first thing you hear about it? What would have happened then if it was a great idea and everybody loved it is that the community would have been carried along with it and people would have embraced it. Instead, people are now against it.

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