Page 2430 - Week 11 - Thursday, 2 November 1989

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .


Stefaniak mentioned a few examples. A ticket might blow away. Someone could take it, not just to use it on his own vehicle but he could also do it for mischievous purposes. Someone could well lend a car to a friend and the friend might either deliberately or inadvertently not tell the owner. Perhaps the friend meant to pay the ticket or whatever. I was aware of a case recently where that happened to somebody, and the person did not know at all. The car could also be stolen. There are a great number of stolen cars, and when they are abandoned people usually do not worry too much about whether they are parked correctly. So, for all these reasons, it is very reasonable not to go into the extra expense and time needed to correct matters once they have run on far too long.

There are two other reasons why the amendments should be agreed to. One is that it is revenue relevant. That means that it will be like the case of ACT Electricity and Water. Once it started sending out reminder notices instead of turning off people's electricity - like Telecom when it cuts your phone off - it found that the response was absolutely superb and helped a great deal, firstly, in terms of the revenue coming into the organisation and, secondly, it did absolute wonders for public relations. Customers - that is an interesting term to use under the Motor Traffic Bill - are a lot happier.

If one gets booked and forgets about it, or one did not know about it and so on, a reminder is a fair thing. So let us have a look at the various reasons that people may have for not knowing about having received a ticket. Certainly people may not have paid it initially and it may be their own responsibility, but 14 days is not very long anyway. The other thing is that some people, when they are issued with fairly expensive - and they are expensive - parking or traffic infringement notices, simply do not have the money to pay them.

Mrs Grassby: They should not break the law in the first place.

MR STEVENSON: Well, there are actually reasons for people doing this. We say, "One should not break the law". But it is true that there are different laws, and some have different standing to others. I can certainly admit to having received a parking infringement notice or two.

Mrs Grassby: Never, Dennis!

MR STEVENSON: Yes, indeed, I have given a few and have got a few back. It is probably a fair exchange. I think it is the case that some people cannot afford it and they think they will have to save up for it, and to have to pay it immediately is not a reasonable thing. So there are many logical reasons. The fact that, with this Bill, we have tightened up the situation dramatically should be enough. Let us not go to the extremes of not even giving people an opportunity of a reminder as well.


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .