Page 6151 - Week 19 - Tuesday, 17 December 1991

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


Mr Moore: In the next sitting.

MR CONNOLLY: I will give it to him at question time this afternoon or I will write to him. I can certainly assure him of that. I can assure all members that the Motor Vehicle Registry will continue to strive to be more realistic and more sensible in this matter and take every reasonable precaution to ensure that people know that they have a notice.

But the suggestion of personal service and a written acknowledgment from the person saying, "Yes, please cancel my registration", is just laughable, because the problem people now just laugh at a speeding fine and throw it in the rubbish bin. Essentially Mr Jensen is proposing that they get a letter from the Government saying, "You have been a naughty person. You have not paid your fines repeatedly. We are going to cancel your registration if you are kind enough to write back to us and say, 'Yes, Government, please cancel my registration', otherwise you can continue to flout the law in peace. All you need to do to continue to flout the law is to not answer this letter". It is a silly proposal. I thank members for their general support for the Bills. I assure them that we will administer this sensibly.

Question resolved in the affirmative.

Bill agreed to in principle.

Leave granted to dispense with the detail stage.

Bill agreed to.

MAGISTRATES COURT (AMENDMENT) BILL (NO. 3) 1991

Debate resumed from 12 December 1991, on motion by Mr Connolly:

That this Bill be agreed to in principle.

MR COLLAERY (11.08): Mr Speaker, this is a consequential Bill which the Rally supports. I also seek to move the amendment to this Bill which has been circulated in my name.

Mr Connolly: I raise a point of order.

MR COLLAERY: I foreshadow that.

Mr Connolly: On a point of order, Mr Speaker, I would seek your ruling, under standing order 181, as to the admissibility of this amendment. It is an amendment relating to the cost of transcript in criminal proceedings generally, and I would suggest that it is not relevant to the subject matter of the Bill that is under debate.


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