Page 3497 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 12 October 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
In those instances drivers have been known to go to the inside of the track, thereby getting well away from the 30 metres needed to do a proper noise reading. The provisions of the schedule will ensure that the noise reading is the most accurate possible in all the circumstances.
It also requires the measuring devices to be calibrated, not only before and after the readings are taken but also, on a regular basis, at periods of not longer than two years, so that complete accuracy can be obtained. The calibrating devices and the technical requirements involved here are very similar to the technical requirements for the breathalyser, which I had a fair bit to do with as a prosecutor. One of the big problems with current measurements of sound has been allegations of lack of use of proper procedures. If those things where absolute accuracy has to be used by the testing officer were challenged in a court, I would think that prosecutions under the current Act would be few and far between. That would involve the Government in a lot of expense - if the problems that we had when the breathalyser was introduced are anything to go by. As lawyers would know, in the ACT it took about 10 years to get the breathalyser right. This is a very technical piece of legislation. When one measures sound or anything else by means of mechanical instruments, by its very nature, in fairness to the people concerned, it has to be accurate.
This Bill brings the ACT into line with the standards used in other States. It is a Bill that will provide certainty and protection to all people concerned in this issue - not only to people involved in the motor sports but also to citizens who may not particularly like motor sports and who may be concerned about excessive noise. It is a Bill that properly represents all interests. It is well overdue. It is a Bill by which all sensible people involved in the area - whether they are residents who may not know about motor sport or whether they are participants - can have a definable, accurate means of measuring noise. Rather than having to wait minutes or even hours for someone to turn up to measure the noise, if a vehicle is emitting too much noise, that vehicle can be stopped, sent home and not allowed back on the track until such time as it is fixed. That is the procedure adopted in other States, and that should be the procedure here. This is a fair Bill, and I commend it to the house. Madam Speaker, I seek leave to present an explanatory memorandum.
Leave granted.
MR LAMONT (Minister for Urban Services, Minister for Housing and Community Services, Minister for Industrial Relations and Minister for Sport): Madam Speaker, I seek leave to speak on this matter before the Minister does.
Leave granted.
MR LAMONT: I have taken the unusual step of seeking leave to comment on the Bill at this early stage, on the day that it is introduced, to raise a number of concerns that I have. First of all, some of the comment that has been made as justification for the introduction of a Bill such as this is erroneous, because it relies on what is believed to be the accepted standard adopted by CAMS in the State of New South Wales; that is, that a measurement of 95 dB(A) at 30 metres is an acceptable measurement to determine the level of background noise or the level of noise which should be agreed to at a motor sports venue.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .