Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2022 Week 02 Hansard (Wednesday, 23 March 2022) . . Page.. 495 ..
The amendments in the bill seek to protect all road users in all transport modes and on all parts of the road network. The potential for dangerous and unsafe conduct on our roads to have serious or catastrophic consequences is high. Strong enforcement tools play a critical role in deterring these behaviours on our roads. Strengthening enforcement tools to better address negligent driving that occasions actual bodily harm will ensure that, where a driver disregards the safety of fellow road users, the territory’s legislative framework provides strong and proportionate penalties that are commensurate with the road safety risk associated with the unsafe behaviour and support behavioural change.
The consequence of a driver driving a motor vehicle in a negligent manner is not solely borne by them. All road users wear the risk of this behaviour, including other drivers, vulnerable road users, and people using our road and public transport networks. For this reason, I acknowledge the importance of the fact that the reforms proposed to be made today address dangerous and unsafe behaviours across all road users and all transport modes.
A regulatory framework that supports Vision Zero is vital to ensure that every Canberran gets home safely to their family. I commend the work of the minister to address this issue of dangerous and unsafe behaviours on the roads. I stand today in support of this bill and commend the bill, including the government amendments, to the Assembly.
Amendment agreed to.
Proposed new clauses 7A and 7B agreed to.
MR STEEL (Murrumbidgee—Minister for Skills, Minister for Transport and City Services and Special Minister of State) (11.49): I move amendment No 2 circulated in my name [see schedule 1 at page 547]. This amendment changes the threshold in the proposed new subsection 304A(1) from reasonable belief to reasonable suspicion. This reflects some feedback from ACT Policing about the enforcement of this offence. We believe that it is appropriate to have a lower threshold when it comes to a police officer directing a person to get off or not get on a vehicle. The consequence of that direction is not significant; therefore, we believe that the lower threshold is appropriate.
Amendment agreed to.
Clause 8, as amended, agreed to.
MS CLAY (Ginninderra) (11.51): I move amendment No 1 circulated in my name [see schedule 2 at page 548]. I table a supplementary explanatory statement. I am speaking in support of the government bill, the government amendments to the bill