Page 4397 - Week 10 - Thursday, 22 September 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
that it will be misused. We saw today in the Canberra Times that a representative of a steering committee suggested that using unmanned aerial vehicles would be a good way to clamp down on offending vehicles or vehicles of interest after they have gone through a point-to-point speed camera detection zone.
We think this kind of use is going far beyond the scope of what the government stated in the original explanatory statement and, indeed, beyond the scope of the updated explanatory statement. Whilst the amendments help, I still think there is a risk, and I believe it is an unreasonable risk. However, the Canberra Liberals will support these amendments because they make it better.
MR CORBELL: (Molonglo—Attorney-General, Minister for the Environment, Sustainable Development, Minister for Territory and Municipal Services and Minister for Police and Emergency Services) (6.14): First of all, Mr Coe knows that the argument he raises about aerial surveillance is a complete furphy. He knows it is a furphy, because it is not an authorised use in the government’s bill. He knows that, but that does not stop him seeking a cheap headline.
Mrs Dunne: It’s a good story, though.
MR CORBELL: And Mrs Dunne concedes the point: “It’s a good story, though,” says Mrs Dunne. The Liberals know, Mr Speaker, that there is no prospect of that occurring because they know that it is not in the legislation. Of course, it would be unlawful under the legislation and the clauses that we are currently dealing with to allow that to occur.
The government will not be opposing the amendments from Ms Bresnan. We have some reservations about the approach being adopted, which is to ensure that future uses of images from the camera are not agreed by this Assembly without proper consideration. The government fully endorses the principle that future Assemblies should consider very carefully the privacy and human rights implications of proposed new laws before they are adopted, including the impact of new provisions that deal with use or disclosure information that does or may affect personal privacy. We consider that the framework for reviewing proposed legislation under the Human Rights Act remains the best way to ensure that future laws take due account of the right to privacy and other human rights.
Ms Bresnan’s amendments Nos 2 and 3 to Mr Corbell’s proposed amendment agreed to.
Mr Corbell’s amendment, as amended, agreed to.
Clause 27, as amended, agreed to.
Remainder of bill, by leave, taken as a whole.
MR COE (Ginninderra) (6.17): I move amendment No 3 circulated in my name [see schedule 1 at page 4409].
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video