Page 3024 - Week 09 - Thursday, 21 September 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
amendments. I look forward to this government revisiting this act and giving it close scrutiny through a human rights lens.
MR HARGREAVES (Brindabella—Minister for the Territory and Municipal Services, Minister for Housing and Minister for Multicultural Affairs) (11.41): The Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) Amendment Bill 2006 provides for clarification of the period the Chief Police Officer is required to keep vehicles seized in relation to the commission of certain dangerous driving offences. Section 10C (1) (a) of the Road Transport (Safety and Traffic Management) Act 1999 provides that a police officer may seize a vehicle if the officer believes that the vehicle is being or has been used by a person committing offences set out in sections 5A, 5B or 8 of the act. I reiterate the words “if the officer believes that”. Sections 5A, 5B and 8 of the act relate to races, attempts on speed records, speed trials, burnouts and other prohibited conduct, and menacing driving. These are serious offences and offenders need to be punished appropriately.
Mr Speaker, the act currently provides that the Chief Police Officer must keep a seized vehicle until a person is dealt with by a court for the offence, an infringement notice is served on the person for the offence, or if a prosecution for the offence is not started within 28 days after the seizure of the vehicle—the 28 days end. Section 10B of the act provides that if a court convicts a person or finds them guilty of one of the offences I have mentioned then for a first offender the vehicle is impounded for a maximum of three months unless the court orders otherwise and any period that the vehicle has already been impounded is deducted from the period the court orders.
The existing provisions of the act do not envisage the circumstances where the prosecution for the offence is started within 28 days of the alleged offence and matters taking more than three months to be finalised by the court. In these circumstances the Chief Police Officer finds herself in the position of having to hold on to vehicles beyond the period the act indicates should be the period the vehicle is impounded for a first offence.
The amendment provides for the Chief Police Officer to release a vehicle three months after the date on which it was seized in the case of a person who would not be treated as a repeat offender should they come before the court—that is, if they have not been convicted or found guilty of a relevant offence in the previous five years. This change means that a person will not be subject to being deprived of their vehicle for longer than they could have been deprived of their vehicle if dealt with by the courts. I seek the support of members for the bill.
Question resolved in the affirmative.
Bill agreed to in principle.
Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.
Bill agreed to.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .