Page 2014 - Week 06 - Thursday, 9 June 2016
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
People who commit this throwing offence ignore the fact that it is an extremely dangerous practice to interfere in this way with someone riding a bike. It may take only one stumble or swerve for there to be death or a serious injury. It is appropriate that this offence is clearly defined in our legislation so that we can deter this dangerous offence as well as suitably prosecute people who commit it.
Articulating the offence in our legislation also sends a clear message. We strive to be a jurisdiction that is open and friendly to people using all forms of transport. In fact, we want to particularly encourage people to use more sustainable and active means of travelling. This offence will complement other amendments we have made in a similar vein, such as specifying that dangerous driving around vulnerable road users is an aggravating factor for that offence.
The offence, of course, also applies to throwing objects at other vehicles, and it would cover a car driver throwing something at another car driver, or pedestrians throwing objects at cars or trucks. For example, people have been known to throw rocks or other items from bridges onto vehicles below. This is all extremely unsafe and criminal behaviour and it is appropriate that our laws recognise it. People need to be able to travel around our city safely.
I also want to mention the amendment that defers commencement of provisions allowing employers to conduct covert surveillance of employees outside the workplace in certain strict circumstances. Although the Assembly only recently passed these changes, I decided that it is sensible to delay their commencement and to conduct a broader review of the civil surveillance space.
There are actually many unresolved issues in this area as well as emerging issues related to new technology. These began to come to light particularly as we began to investigate more broadly while putting together the workplace surveillance changes. Terms of reference have been provided to a consultant to produce an initial issues paper. This will be used as the basis for future public consultation as well as targeted consultation with stakeholders with a direct interest in the conduct of civil surveillance.
The review will consider the following issues: the occurrence and use of surveillance in civil litigation claims in the territory; the extent of existing regulation of surveillance activities, including regulation of surveillance businesses; whether the Listening Devices Act 1992 should be expanded to capture video surveillance and electronic monitoring; the ability of existing legislation to respond to emerging surveillance technologies and practices such as smartphones, fitness trackers, geo-tagging and drones; the possible need for a tort of breach of privacy; and the interaction of provisions regulating surveillance with other ACT legislation, including the Information Privacy Act 2014, the Workplace Privacy Act 2011 and the Human Rights Act 2004. My intention is that the ACT come up with a best practice model for regulating this interesting, and sometimes controversial, and rapidly evolving area of the civil law.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video