Page 1881 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 5 May 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
In order to ensure that the owner of any collected vehicle is aware of what has happened to their vehicle, procedural change will also be introduced. This change will see a second written notice sent by mail to the registered operator if the vehicle has been moved to the government retention area. This second notice will advise the registered operator what actions will be taken if they do not take steps to retrieve their vehicle from the retention area.
I think we would all agree that Canberra is a beautiful city. It is renowned as one of the world’s great planned cities. I think I am not alone in having an aversion to anything that detracts from the beauty of this city. As I said, through my mobile offices I am reminded on a weekly basis of how important this is.
Let us all encourage each other and others to be proud of this city and to come to the realisation that if they litter someone else has to clear up after them. That someone else is the territory government, particularly the city rangers in the Department of Territory and Municipal Services. Their job in maintaining our environment will be greatly improved with the passing of this bill. Remember, it is all of us that have to pay for cleaning up this problem.
If we can make a difference through this legislation to streamline the processes and make it easier for our rangers to do their job, this must be for the better. I commend the bill to the Assembly.
MR STANHOPE (Ginninderra—Chief Minister, Minister for Transport, Minister for Territory and Municipal Services, Minister for Business and Economic Development, Minister for Indigenous Affairs and Minister for the Arts and Heritage) (12.32), in reply: Before discussing the bill, I draw members’ attention to the scrutiny of bills committee’s report, which Ms Le Couteur touched on, too. The committee had no issue with the bill but made some constructive suggestions to clarify aspects of the explanatory statement to the bill. As a result, a revised explanatory statement has been prepared for the bill, picking up the first two suggestions made by the committee and clarifying the intent of proposed section 12F, particularly in relation to why the offence in that section is not a strict liability offence, and that is an issue which Ms Le Couteur has just touched on. I thank the committee for its work.
The bill will modify existing provisions of the Roads and Public Places Act to allow for the more timely removal of abandoned vehicles in the ACT. The bill streamlines the process of notifying the owner of a potentially abandoned vehicle. This is important as abandoned vehicles regularly attract unwanted attention from vandals or thieves if left unattended. Indeed, I noticed just two weeks ago that a car that had been abandoned at Glenloch Interchange, after having sat on the side of the road for three days, was turned onto its roof by vandals—just, I presume, as a result of whatever it is that vandals do things like that for. That incident two weeks ago reinforces the government’s attempt to try to do something about that sort of situation.
Mr Hanson: It wasn’t just a car stuck on the GDE, was it, Jon?
MR STANHOPE: No, it was an abandoned vehicle that vandals had turned on its roof—for fun, presumably, or whatever it is that vandals do.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .