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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1998 Week 2 Hansard (20 May) . . Page.. 371 ..

MR OSBORNE (continuing):

As you will recall, Mr Speaker, in the last Assembly we did have this debate in the context of a number of motor traffic amendments and the issue was quite hotly debated. As I said earlier, the proposal was defeated. Mr Speaker, the main reason why I have reintroduced it is that I feel it is a necessary requirement that people driving be able to establish their identity, especially for the police. I think it is an absurd situation when we have police officers pulling people up by the roadside who are unlicensed. Perhaps their licences have been suspended by the courts, but they drive away because they have given a false name and they are given three days' grace to come in and to produce their licence.

Having spent a number of years in the police force in New South Wales, I have to admit to being quite surprised when I found, when this issue was raised last year, that in the ACT it was not compulsory to carry your drivers licence. I know of one case here in the ACT about which I had a fellow ring me. His brother had been pulled over by the police a couple of times and had given his name and date of birth. His brother had a number of warrants come through and he was in a very distressed state when he realised what had happened. I think by having this small amendment the job of the police in identifying people will be made that much easier. It will eradicate any concerns and any problems that the police have found in the last few years. As I said, Mr Speaker, I do not think it is an issue which many people will find much problem with. I commend this Bill to the house.

Debate (on motion by Mr Smyth) adjourned.


MR OSBORNE (11.19): Mr Speaker, I move:

That this Assembly:

(1) notes that the ACT Supreme Court passed from the Commonwealth's jurisdiction to the ACT's jurisdiction in 1991;

(2) notes that the Court is the Territory's highest judicial body;

(3) notes that the Court's building continues to display the Commonwealth coat of arms prominently; and

(4) calls on the Government to arrange for the ACT Supreme Court building to display the coat of arms of the city of Canberra in place of the Commonwealth coat of arms.

Mr Speaker, when the ACT was granted self-government in 1989, we were only partly a jurisdiction in our own right. The Supreme Court passed from the jurisdiction of the Commonwealth to that of the ACT in 1991. With that transfer, the court became the ACT's court of superior jurisdiction and the superior division of the third arm of government. Recently, while I was passing the Supreme Court, I was surprised to see that it continues to display the Commonwealth crest, instead of the coat of arms of the city of Canberra.

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