HANSARD
SITTING CALENDAR
SEARCH
LIVE BROADCAST
Hansard Dynamic Member Index
Legislative Council - Fifty-Fourth Parliament, Second Session (54-2)
2020-06-30 Daily Xml
Contents
Pdf Xml

Statutes Amendment (Licence Disqualification) Bill

Second Reading

Adjourned debate on second reading.

(Continued from 17 June 2020.)

The Hon. K.J. MAHER (Leader of the Opposition) (15:45): I rise to speak on this bill and indicate that I am the lead speaker for the opposition. The government has tabled the Attorney's speech from another place, which goes into some detail about the technical aspects of this bill. As such, I will not go into the same level of detail, but I will provide a short summary.

This bill makes two small changes to the Motor Vehicles Act (the MVA) and the Road Traffic Act (the RTA) that make the calculation of licence disqualification easier. In simple terms, if a person is subject to immediate loss of licence via a police officer, then that is subject to a court process. The law sets down a minimum disqualification period based on the level of seriousness of the offence. The court may set a disqualification period that is not less than the mandatory minimum, minus any period already served under the immediate loss of licence, and the court may set a disqualification period longer than the minimum, if the court sees fit.

Under current law, outcomes that deal with minimum disqualification periods take into account the police imposed immediate loss of licence that may be achieved. However, the outcome described above requires a process of calculation application. The intent of this bill is to improve court efficiency by establishing court imposed minimums that link the two periods. The bill amends the Road Traffic Act to achieve this outcome and makes consequential amendments to the Motor Vehicles Act to reflect the updates to the Road Traffic Act.

It is often said that imitation is the greatest form of flattery, and in that case the opposition would be duly flattered by the introduction of this bill. The provisions have been taken almost identically from the Statutes Amendment (Transport Portfolio) Bill 2017 that was brought into parliament under the former government. The bill was then affected by parliament being prorogued before the 2018 election.

It is interesting to note that it is more than two years since this measure has been taken up by the current government. It would be interesting to see why a measure that aims to improve the efficiency of how one aspect of the administration of justice works has taken two years to reintroduce. The Treasurer, although he is not a lawyer, might have an idea as to why there has been a two-year period before a measure to increase court efficiency has been taken up.

Also, the Treasurer might be in a position to inform the chamber why a number of other measures that were included in the previous bill—the streamlining for referrals of expiation notices; introducing a penalty for making a false statement on an online expiation referral; supporting a tow away of vehicles that are parked in clearways; and additional powers to the police commissioner with regard to immediate loss of licence—the former government's transport portfolio bill, were deemed not worthy of reintroduction by way of this bill, and why this is the only measure from that bill that the government feels ought to be moved upon.

With that, I indicate support of the bill and look forward to the Treasurer explaining why this is the only measure from a previous bill that the government has seen fit to give effect to.

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (Treasurer) (15:48): I thank the honourable member for his contribution and for his wholehearted support for the government's initiative in this particular area. When my adviser arrives, I will endeavour to answer any questions the honourable member may well wish to put.

I do have some answers, I think, to questions that Mr Odenwalder might have put in the House of Assembly. I am not sure whether they have already been answered or if I am to provide those answers on behalf of the minister. When the cavalry arrives in the context of the Attorney-General's adviser, if I am required to place on the record the government's response to Mr Odenwalder's questions, I will do so at clause 1 of the committee stage of the debate.

Bill read a second time.

Committee Stage

In committee.

Clause 1.

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS: I am advised that a question was put by Mr Odenwalder, the member for Elizabeth, to the Attorney-General in another place and the answer that has been approved by the Attorney-General to the member for Elizabeth's question is as follows. The government has already implemented one of the other measures contained in the Statutes Amendment (Transport Portfolio) Bill 2017 by amending the Road Traffic Act 1961 to enable the penalty that applies to a body corporate that fails to nominate the driver of a vehicle that is involved in the commission of a camera detected offence to be prescribed by regulation and to increase the maximum penalties that apply to camera detected offences.

These amendments were part of the Statutes Amendment (Budget Measures) Act 2019 and came into operation on 3 October last year. As a result of these amendments, the penalty that applies to a body corporate that fails to nominate the driver of the vehicle was increased by regulation from $300 to $1,800 for a single offence and from $600 to $3,600 where the vehicle was involved in both a red light offence and a speeding offence as part of the same incident.

The maximum penalty for individuals was increased to $5,000 from maximums of $3,000 for a single offence and $4,000 where the vehicle was involved in both a red light offence and a speeding offence as part of the same incident. The maximum penalty for bodies corporate was increased to $10,000 from maximums of $4,000 for a single offence and $5,000 where the vehicle was involved in both a red light offence and a speeding offence as part of the same incident.

I am advised by the Minister for Transport, Infrastructure and Local Government that some of the remaining measures from the 2017 bill have been considered for reintroduction into parliament. If any of the measures are approved for reintroduction, they will be reintroduced in accordance with the government's priorities.

Clause passed.

Remaining clauses (2 to 5) and title passed.

Bill reported without amendment.

Third Reading

The Hon. R.I. LUCAS (Treasurer) (15:54): I move:

That this bill be now read a third time.

Bill read a third time and passed.

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