HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Subject Index
House of Assembly - Fifty-Fourth Parliament, First Session (54-1)
2018-12-05 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Criminal Law Consolidation (Throwing Objects at Vehicles) Amendment Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 20 June 2018.)

Mr PICTON (Kaurna) (11:00): It is fantastic to have the opportunity to be able to speak.

Members interjecting:

The SPEAKER: Members, please leave quietly, if doing so, so I can hear the member for Kaurna. Thank you.

Mr PICTON: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Yet again we have another piece of legislation—

The Hon. S.K. Knoll interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The Minister for Transport and Infrastructure is called to order.

Mr PICTON: Hear, hear! Chuck him out.

The SPEAKER: I might.

Mr PICTON: Yet again we have another piece of legislation that has been put up by this constructive opposition that is trying to improve the laws of South Australia. We introduced this bill many, many months ago. We have been unsuccessful in getting a vote on this legislation. I have been trying to speak on it for probably the last couple of months, so it is a welcome opportunity to be able to do so. This is an important issue for people across the state—

Mr Patterson interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Morphett is interjecting again.

Mr PICTON: —but particularly for people of the southern suburbs where we have seen, sadly, a spate of rock throwing attacks in the south. Sadly, we have seen the damage that has incurred on people. It is an absolutely hideous act to threaten somebody's life by throwing a projectile from a bridge.

When we saw the spate of attacks earlier this year, the opposition, through the opposition leader, the shadow minister for transport and the shadow minister for police, announced an action plan to tackle this issue to make sure that the people on the Southern Expressway were safe. This bill formed a key part of that action plan. It was to make sure that we increased the penalties for people throwing projectiles at cars on our roads.

This could happen not only on the Southern Expressway but also on other roads in South Australia. It has been particularly an issue in the south. Before the current spate of rock throwing started this year, there was an issue last year, or perhaps even the year before, when a woman who lives in my electorate of Seaford was driving her car with her husband. She was pregnant at the time. A rock was thrown from a bridge; in fact, I am led to believe it was a manhole cover for a SA Water or SA Power Networks duct. It was thrown at her car and caused tremendous damage to the car. Potentially, it could have been life threatening.

That was one issue that happened then. Since then, this year we have seen so many attacks happen. This is something where we as a parliament have the ability to take a stand, to say that this is not acceptable and to say that we view these as very serious offences that should see increased penalties. That is why the member for Elizabeth brought this bill to the parliament. It has been languishing on the Notice Paper for months and months and months now, but now we have the opportunity to do something about it.

We have the opportunity before we go into the summer recess, before the government puts its feet up over Christmas, to say, 'Let's get this done now.' Let's get this done this morning. Send it to the upper house and get this bill through so that, if we were to have any rock throwing incidents over the summer break in the Christmas-new year period, then this would be able to be in place and those higher penalties would apply. We do know that there is an increase in this sort of activity when we have Christmas holidays and school holidays.Having this legislation in place before then is vitally important.

I would hate to think that the government, who still act like they are the opposition, would want to block this legislation and prevent it from passing. I would encourage the member for Hammond not to get up and move an adjournment of this debate yet again, for probably the 10th time now, but to actually allow the parliament to vote on this subject. Do we believe that throwing projectiles at cars deserves a higher penalty? That is a pretty simple question, and it is something that all members should be able to make a decision on.

We on this side say, yes, we think the penalty should be increased. We think we can do it now. If the people who sit on the other side of the chamber do not believe that there should be increased penalties, then say so. Vote that way. Vote against this and make it clear. Continuing to defer this means delaying laws that can help make it clear that this is unacceptable behaviour in South Australia and that the people who carry out this offence should be prosecuted to a very high standard.

I know the member for Hurtle Vale had personal experience helping people who had been the subject of rock throwing attacks when she worked as a retrieval nurse and ICU nurse. I know there is broad support from within the community, particularly in the south, and I am sure there is the potential for this to happen in other areas as well. We have hundreds of bridges in South Australia; this could potentially happen on any of them.

This is an easy change for us to make, and it will improve the laws of this state. It will send a clear message that if people perpetrate this crime they will face higher penalties. We can do this now. We can vote on this right now, pass this law and make sure it is in place for the Christmas summer break. We can make sure that higher penalties will apply if rocks are thrown at people during that period. I would hate to see this debate adjourned. I would hate to see a disappointing outcome from the government. I urge the House of Assembly to pass this legislation now and not to adjourn it yet again.

The Hon. S.K. KNOLL (Schubert—Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Local Government, Minister for Planning) (11:06): I rise to make a contribution to this bill and to say that the government dealt with this issue very quickly upon coming to government. This is not a new issue. This is not an issue that arrived on 18 March; this is an issue that has existed in the southern suburbs for some time. Yes, we saw a ramping up of the number of incidents over March, April and May, but this is not a new issue.

We know it is not a new issue because the originating offence of throwing objects at vehicles exists in the statute book as a previous attempt to deal with this problem. A five-year penalty exists within the current statute, and that offence did not act as an effective deterrent to stop people from throwing rocks off the bridges over the Southern Expressway.

The members of the opposition would like to double the offence. Sure, that is great, in theory—fantastic, in theory—but it does not deal with the fundamental issue that existed in the southern suburbs, and it does not deal with the fundamental issues that we need to address in order to actually fix this problem, as opposed to doing what members of the opposition do: introduce politically opportunistic legislation to make themselves feel like they are trying to do something on the topic.

Mr Picton: So do you support it or oppose it?

The SPEAKER: The member for Kaurna is called to order.

The Hon. S.K. KNOLL: We on this side of the house have said time and time again that we actually want to enact legislation and non-legislative measures to fix this problem. Do you know what, Mr Speaker? Over the past six months, we have done that. We saw a high number of potential rock throwing attacks and put a series of measures in place, from both an infrastructure point of view and a policing point of view, and dealt with the problem—not by superficial means, but by some actual and real means.

There are two main ways that we have able to do that. The first is that we worked together with SAPOL. South Australia Police undertook to provide extensive extra policing in that area to make sure they could deal with the problem on the ground—to interview potential suspects of rock throwing incidents and to patrol the areas by various means in order to make sure there was enough of a police presence to deter people from undertaking these acts in the first place.

SAPOL then engaged with the community and with high schools and used their resources to tackle this in a community-based way. I think the work South Australia Police has done is fantastic. The reason I think it is fantastic is that the attacks have stopped. Again, these are the kinds of measures that a government needs to put in place in conjunction with the police force to be able to really fix this problem.

The second part of the solution that we put in place is around reducing and eliminating the ability for people to throw rocks in the first place, not to merely stand at the bottom of the cliff but to put the ambulance at the top of the cliff. To that end, this government moved very swiftly to spend $15 million to fix this problem from an infrastructure standpoint. In fact, we immediately took steps to put mesh over the rocks on the embankments under the various bridges along the corridor to be able to stop people from being able to opportunistically walk up and grab a rock and chuck it off the edge.

We also improved the CCTV cameras around the area so that when these people do these things we give an added resource to SAPOL to be able to pinch the morons who are doing it. Then we moved to put a temporary throw screen solution in place along the various bridges. We are talking now about road bridges as opposed to pedestrian bridges that already had cages put over the top of them to stop people from being able to lob something over the side. Right at this moment, whether it is Honeypot Road or the other roads along that corridor over the next few months, starting this weekend, we are going to see permanent throw screens put in place to stop people from being able to throw rocks off the edge.

That is not something that just makes people feel like a government is doing something. That is what a government does to actually fix the problem. This is going to require constant vigilance. We cannot be complacent about the fact that this issue may come back. But what we do know is that we now have a series of measures that we have tried and tested in a live situation that we know deals with the problem. This is what this government will do, and that is not to try to deal with token measures that try to make people feel good; it is actually to do something that is going to make a difference on the ground.

After having shown the South Australian people that we have taken the steps to solve this problem, and work in conjunction with the police who have done a fantastic job from their end to be able to deal with the community on the ground and provide that policing presence to provide that deterrent effect, we have got on with solving the issue. So we will not be supporting this bill because we are here to deliver and make real change in our community. Where we see real change can be implemented, we will, and where we see that we get positive results, we will continue to do what works.

In the meantime, what I encourage members opposite to do, instead of being opportunistic and political, is to get on board with the solutions that work for their communities, for the electorates they represent—the member for Kaurna, the member for Hurtle Vale, the member for Reynell and others—and to do what works. If we, as a government, continue to focus on delivering solutions that work, then people in the communities will see real change to their living standards and real change to their ability to move in and around their communities, instead of just having a parliament that tries to do something that is at the edge and tokenistic, and they will see us get on and provide real change to people's lives.

Ms COOK (Hurtle Vale) (11:13): I would like to rise to support this very important bill that proposes a change to the sentencing of people who throw projectiles and missiles at vehicles. I would like to talk from a point of view that takes the focus off bridges. While the government would like us to think that they have solved this problem entirely by putting permanent fixtures in place across bridges on the expressway, I would like to take you all back to January 2005. I headed off to work at about 6.15pm ready to do a 12-hour shift in the intensive care unit at Flinders Medical Centre.

I arrived at work, and we took our normal handover. There is a process that happens when a very serious case comes into the emergency department whereby teams are mobilised out of the intensive care unit and out of the surgical units to attend the emergency room and provide expert care as soon as possible. We were notified that a young male with an open head injury was on his way into the hospital after having been the victim of an incident in a car along Happy Valley Drive at Happy Valley.

I was a team leader in the intensive care unit that night, so we prepared a bed space to accept the patient, if needed, from the emergency department or, in fact, from the operating room. Well, this young man was in such a terrible state that they brought him straight to the intensive care unit. At a guess, there were 10 nurses and 10 doctors in that small intensive care suite and there was a young man in the bed who had, reportedly, had a rock thrown at his car. It had come through the windscreen and hit him right on the front of his head. It hit him with such force that it removed his scalp and the bone covering his brain.

I stood there for what felt like forever, but I think it was about three-quarters of an hour, while doctors worked to clear his head. He had a tube in his throat, he was sedated and, basically, his brain was exposed and he was bleeding from the head. It is probably one of the most traumatic experiences that I have ever been through in my life as a nurse. Of course, there are equals, but to stand there while the doctors were trying to save this young man's life and stabilise him enough to even think about moving him to the operating room was something I will never forget.

The story then goes that he did go to the operating room. We waited all night for him to come back. I think he went to the operating room at around 10pm. His family were beside themselves. His girlfriend, who was in the car with him at the time, ended up with this piece of skull on her lap. They were completely traumatised. He did not come back that night. I went home. I did not sleep. I think I got back to work again the next night after having probably two hours' sleep all day after working the 12-hour shift, and he had come back from the operating room.

He survived. His name is Damian DeWitt and he is a friend of mine. He now has a son, he is married and he is one of the bravest blokes I know. He will tell you that rocks do not just get thrown from bridges, that stories like this need to be told and that people may not be deterred by any sentence. I am on record as not being a proponent of bigger sentences stopping crime, but—

The Hon. S.K. Knoll: Are you voting against it?

Ms COOK: I beg your pardon? Did you want to speak louder, Minister for Transport?

The SPEAKER: Could the Minister for Transport, who has already been called to order, not interject the member for Hurtle Vale. Could she also please not respond to those interjections.

Ms COOK: Sorry, sir. It was a very quick reaction of mine. What I want to say is that sentencing for longer, however, does keep people who flout this and who are prepared to take somebody's life off the streets for longer. They do not deserve to be out in the public if they deliberately and wilfully throw a missile at a car and destroy a whole community.

With that, I commend our shadow minister, the member for Elizabeth, for responding quickly around this one component that stops crime. It takes education, community support and awareness, good government, good governance and cooperative parliaments to put appropriate penalties in place. Then it takes a good corrections system to spend the time to rehabilitate, support and re-educate people who come from a background of hating themselves so much that they could not care less what they do to other people.

I thank the shadow minister for bringing in this piece of legislation. I thank the government for allowing us to have the opportunity to debate it today, and I would encourage them to go away and reconsider their position and put themselves in the position of a parent whose son or daughter could lose their life because of an idiot who wants to throw rocks at cars.

Mr TEAGUE (Heysen) (11:20): I am moved to make some brief remarks in relation to the debate on this bill that would provide a simple amendment to the Criminal Law Consolidation Act in relation to penalty with respect to section 32A—Throwing objects at vehicles.

I listened carefully to the member for Hurtle Vale's contribution, and the member firstly described an incident that occurred in 2005. As I understand it, the alleged perpetrator was apprehended in 2009 and charged with very serious offending, including attempted murder and a number of counts of endangering life. I am quick to observe that the penalties in relation to that offending run to life imprisonment. They are very serious offences, and the member for Hurtle Vale has ably and relevantly described precisely the sort of trauma that results.

The point is that the consequences of these heinous acts lead to very serious charges that carry very serious penalties including, as I say, life imprisonment. While I am quick to observe that the member for Hurtle Vale's contribution and remarks are genuine and born of her genuine experience, it is no substitute for a genuine response to such traumatic circumstances, to see that finding voice in what, frankly, I regard as disingenuous politicking on the part of the opposition this morning, in looking to come along with a heavier penalty for a very specific act in relation to throwing objects.

We know that this is serious criminal conduct, and the possibility that one might cause the sort of harm that has been described by the member for Hurtle Vale is contemplated by the very consequences that occurred in that very case. I do not want to labour the point further by observing that this all occurred a very long time ago, right in the midst of a government that was in power in this state for a very long time—

An honourable member: 16 years.

Mr TEAGUE: —16 years, yet we did not see this being debated as a matter of urgency during that time. The Minister for Transport's contribution earlier this morning in my view ably demonstrates what we are genuinely about on this side of the house as a new government. We are not about looking to take high moral ground or to express indignation or to try and be first to the punch. We are about outcomes. We are about identifying what practical measures might be taken to address the problem that occurs. Where there is a problem, let's address it. Where there is a problem, let's look for an outcome that can be demonstrated.

For the very reasons that the member for Hurtle Vale has so capably adumbrated, these are the very circumstances in which we should do nothing that relates to opportunism or to taking some chance for a cheap political shot in the final days of a parliamentary sitting year. In the specific circumstances in which the government has confronted a problem and addressed it with a view to an outcome, and in circumstances where we know this relates to offending that can have very serious repercussions, for all those reasons this is a debate that provides the opportunity to highlight the difference between substance and opportunism.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS (West Torrens) (11:25): I was not going to talk too much about the member for Heysen's remarks because I do have a high regard for him; in fact, he was my former lawyer and someone I think is very capable in this place. However, I always get concerned when members attempt to judge the motives of other members.

I do not think there is a single member of the Liberal Party in this place who is here to do anything other than the right thing by the people of South Australia but, simply because we disagree on a bill, the government will get up and say that our motives are disingenuous. We are attempting to try to save lives—as is the government.

When the former transport and infrastructure shadow minister stood up at the last election and said that his first act, if he were sworn in as transport and infrastructure minister, would be to immediately issue a tender for the construction of throw screens along the Southern Expressway, no-one in South Australia thought that was anything other than genuine. For whatever reason he was not sworn in as the transport and infrastructure minister. Some internal Liberal Party decision-making changed that and we got a new minister, someone the people of South Australia had not vetted for that role, someone who had not performed in an election campaign for that role, someone the people did not see conduct themselves under the pressure of an election campaign in that role in the third largest budget in South Australia.

The first thing that minister did was not issue a tender for throw screens. He did not do that. He was led there kicking and screaming by public pressure—and probably by some members of his backbench and by the opposition. In the end, no-one questions the motives of the minister to attempt to save lives, and to question the opposition's motives is, I think, an unfair and poor reflection and does not serve this parliament well. I think it debases the very role of this parliament.

People in this country are now sick and tired of us looking at each other as enemies, and I call on the opposition to rise above it and join me in rising to a new level of political standard in this place—

Members interjecting:

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: I did.

Mr Pederick interjecting:

The SPEAKER: The member for Hammond is called to order.

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: Increasing the penalties from five to 10 years is a good measure. It will not solve the problem, but it will go some way to fixing it, as do throw screens. This is not simply one measure or one solution to fix all. There is a series of programs we can implement, and this is us trying to be bipartisan to assist the government. Do not call us disingenuous.

Members interjecting:

The Hon. A. KOUTSANTONIS: You can tell by the laughter opposite how they feel about this.

Mr ODENWALDER (Elizabeth) (11:29): I want to quickly thank all the speakers, and I want to make special mention of the member for Hurtle Vale's contribution, which was very moving. The member for Heysen's contribution was, as always, erudite and very loyal. I largely agree with what he said, except that this bill is aimed at deterring people from even taking the risk.

The offences you were talking about were, rightly, offences charged, which were attempted murder and those types of things. Of course, there are life sentences for those types of things, but these measures are intended to address even attempting to do the stupid thing of dropping a rock off a bridge. I commend the bill to the house. I want to thank all the speakers. I, like the member for West Torrens, expect a bipartisan moment, and I hope there are more to come.

The house divided on the second reading:

Ayes 20

Noes 24

Majority 4

AYES
Bedford, F.E. Bell, T.S. Bettison, Z.L.
Boyer, B.I. Brock, G.G. Brown, M.E.
Close, S.E. Cook, N.F. Gee, J.P.
Hildyard, K.A. Hughes, E.J. Koutsantonis, A.
Malinauskas, P. Mullighan, S.C. Odenwalder, L.K. (teller)
Piccolo, A. Picton, C.J. Stinson, J.M.
Weatherill, J.W. Wortley, D.
NOES
Basham, D.K.B. Chapman, V.A. Cowdrey, M.J.
Cregan, D. Duluk, S. Ellis, F.J.
Gardner, J.A.W. Harvey, R.M. (teller) Knoll, S.K.
Luethen, P. Marshall, S.S. McBride, N.
Murray, S. Patterson, S.J.R. Pederick, A.S.
Pisoni, D.G. Power, C. Sanderson, R.
Speirs, D.J. Teague, J.B. Treloar, P.A.
van Holst Pellekaan, D.C. Whetstone, T.J. Wingard, C.L.

Second reading thus negatived.

PARLIAMENTARY BUSINESS
MEMBERS
GET INVOLVED
ABOUT PARLIAMENT
VISIT
LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL
HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY
CONTACT