House of Assembly Fifty-First Parliament, Third Session (51-3) 51 3 Parliament of South Australia House of Assembly published Bills Police (Prohibition on Performance Targets) Amendment Bill POLICE (PROHIBITION ON PERFORMANCE TARGETS) AMENDMENT BILL Introduction and First Reading Introduction and First Reading The Hon. G.M. GUNN House of Assembly Stuart The Hon. G.M. GUNN (Stuart) (10:37): Obtained leave and introduced a bill for an act to amend the Police Act 1998. Read a first time. Second Reading Second Reading The Hon. G.M. GUNN House of Assembly Stuart The Hon. G.M. GUNN (Stuart) (10:37): I move: That this bill be now read a second time. This bill deals with a practice that has been brought to my attention through the media, that is, that certain elements within the police force were setting targets about the number of vehicles that should be stopped. We all recall sometime ago in The Advertiser where all police officers were going to be requested to stop a minimum of, I think, 70 vehicles— The Hon. J.M. Rankine interjecting: The Hon. G.M. GUNN House of Assembly The Hon. G.M. GUNN: Yes. I suggest that the minister looks back. I therefore believe that, in a democracy, common sense should prevail. If people are flagrantly breaking the law, of course police have a responsibility to act, but you should not have a situation where police are encouraged to stop vehicles or do an interview on the most minor or trifling offences. We currently have a law dealing with trifling offences which, in my view, is not used enough. However, I have brought this matter to the attention of the house because I believe that excessive use of stopping vehicles for minor offences is taking up valuable police resources and is doing nothing to cement a good relationship between the police and the community, which is terribly important, and therefore it is absolutely necessary that some limitations are placed upon this activity. The hallmark of a democracy is how we treat people. It is not the role of a government, its agencies or its instrumentalities to make life as difficult for people as they possibly can. The other very important issue that this house and this parliament should never forget is that, when they are confronted by the government or its agencies, an individual is at grave disadvantage. They do not have the knowledge, often they do not have the resources, and they certainly often do not have the confidence. All members in here probably have the confidence to stand up for their rights, but we see a number of people on a weekly basis in our offices who are confronted with this sort of activity, and clearly they do not have the resources or the knowledge to deal with it, and therefore targets should not be set. The role of the police is to protect the public, and we all accept that. They have in many cases a difficult role to play, but we must ensure that people do not get over-enthusiastic. Their role is not to unduly interfere with the ordinary citizens going about their daily lives, because most of these laws we have in place are to deal with a minority, not with the majority. The majority of people are good, hard-working, decent, law-abiding citizens, and we have brought in and put on the statute books a range of fairly draconian measures because of the actions of a few irresponsible people. Now, from time to time, people in exercising their discretion become over-enthusiastic, and that is why I have brought this proposal to the parliament—to generate discussion in this place. This is the place that passes the laws. We must accept what we do, and the public can judge us accordingly. I look forward to the debate on this measure. The bill takes up only one page, but the effects of it are quite significant. I sincerely hope that all members pay due attention to the provisions of this proposal. I commend the bill to the house. Debate adjourned on motion of Mrs Geraghty.