Page 1883 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 5 May 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I would like to assure members that every possible effort will continue to be made by the city rangers to contact registered operators of vehicles. Initially, this contact will be via the adhesive notice prominently affixed to the vehicle. I consider it more than reasonable for anyone who has left a vehicle in a public area for a considerable length of time with the genuine intention of eventually removing it, to check on that vehicle periodically whilst arranging for its removal. Therefore, I believe that a notice attached to the vehicle itself should be received by the registered operator well before any mailed notice would be delivered to their address.
If the operator sees the notice on their car, then all they have to do is contact the city rangers and let them know that the car is not, in fact, abandoned. The contact details of the city rangers will, of course, be on the notice. However, once the two-day period has passed and the owner or registered operator either has not removed the vehicle or at least contacted the city rangers to let them know that it is not abandoned, the department can step in and move it to a government retention area. Then, in the interests of ensuring that the vehicle really is abandoned, an additional notice will be posted to the last known address of the registered operator. The bill also requires a registered operator who is not the owner of the vehicle to tell the department who the owner is, if they know who that is.
There can be a number of good reasons why a person has left their car in a public place and not been able to return for its collection within two days. The second notice posted to their address will alert them to where their vehicle is being held and let them know what will happen to it if it is not claimed. I have heard that a question has been raised about what happens to a person’s registered vehicle if they are overseas for an extended period of time and leave it in a public place. The answer is exactly what happens at present when a registered vehicle has been left in a public place and the owner does not remove it within a given time frame. If the vehicle looks like it has been abandoned, it will be removed to a government retention area.
I believe it is advisable that anyone that leaves Canberra for an extended period of time not store their vehicle in a public place. I think that is reasonable and, in fact, just common sense. I would suggest that it would be in their bests interests to secure their vehicle on their premises or to store it with a friend or relative to ensure that it is not stolen or vandalised or, indeed, removed under these provisions.
The bill also provides for a new offence of removing, defacing or interfering with a notice. The maximum penalty for a person found committing such an offence is 20 penalty units. Naturally, registered operators or owners of vehicles are permitted to remove the notice, as are government officials acting in their official capacity under the act.
Ms Le Couteur has just given notice of amendments which she proposes to move to require information on the notice itself advising that it is an offence for anyone but the registered operator to tamper with the notice, and the penalty that can be applied. While I am confident that this issue would be addressed by the department in the implementation of the bill, I am happy for it to be addressed through the amendment which Ms Le Couteur proposes. Ms Le Couteur also proposes an amendment that will
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .