Page 5720 - Week 13 - Thursday, 18 November 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
stage. The ACT Greens strongly support the government’s current anti-drink-driving campaign “drink or drive” and that it is appropriate to foster a culture that encourages people to make an active choice prior to going out as to whether they will drink or will drive.
The ACT Greens welcome the lowering of the permissible blood alcohol content for provisional licence holders, as well as licences for professional drivers, instructors, parents and heavy vehicle driver assessors. By lowering the limit to zero for new drivers and their supervisors and instructors, we exclude the problem of inexperienced drivers guessing that they might be under the limit when they go out and ingrain in them a culture of making responsible choices before they do go out.
Additionally, the Greens recognise the importance of discouraging reoffending, and the strengthening of the repeat offender provisions reinforces the message that we expect people to use the experience of being convicted of a drink-driving offence to change their behaviour.
More important, however, is the requirement that an individual attend an alcohol awareness course when an individual is found guilty of a drink-driving offence. We have an amendment which we will move in the detail stage which will assist in ensuring that all people convicted of a drink and drug driving offence will attend an awareness course.
Provisions that allow for police to immediately suspend a driver’s licence upon a person testing positively for an alcohol concentration of .05 recognises the importance in removing from their vehicles individuals who would be dangerous behind the wheel.
I would also like to address the technical amendments relating to the Road Transport (Alcohol and Drugs) (Random Drug Testing) Act 2010, passed earlier this year by the Assembly. The ACT Greens recognise that these amendments are necessary for the smooth function of random drug testing in the ACT. However, we are concerned with the manner in which the government has conducted debate on this matter over the last 12 months in regard to random roadside drug testing.
It is instructive to examine the shifting positions of the government since Mr Hanson first introduced this bill. The government has stated opposition to introducing a random drug testing bill, but then when Mr Hanson introduced his bill the government released a discussion paper that suggested random roadside drug testing as part of a comprehensive suite of road safety reforms. The ACT Greens agreed to hold off on debate of Mr Hanson’s random roadside drug testing bill until we saw the results of consultation, and we adjourned debate in order to see the results of that consultation. One of the adjournments was after a vote to agree in principle on the bill.
On the day that the Assembly was to debate the detail stage of Mr Hanson’s bill, the government released advice provided to them by the human rights commissioner. This is advice the Greens would very much like to have had access to far earlier, particularly as we had tried to engage with the government on Mr Hanson’s bill but had not received any feedback. The human rights commissioner did raise concerns but
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video