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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2000 Week 8 Hansard (30 August) . . Page.. 2698 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

A display would make the event more public. The proposed sign would make the public more aware of the prohibition. Public awareness of the prohibition to sell knives to minors would facilitate the reporting by a member of the public to the police of a retailer who contravened the provision. Given that the Assembly has supported a ban on the sale of knives, I think it is appropriate to have appropriate signage that goes with it.

I think it is true to say that most sellers of knives already abide by the prohibition. The new provision will potentially expose unscrupulous sellers who decide that it is appropriate for them in certain circumstances to make those sales. Hopefully, it will allow members of the public to be more aware of those breaches, perhaps through reporting the people concerned to the police. An incidental benefit arising from the proposed display of a sign is that an underage person would also become aware of the prohibition. It would also assist those who sell knives to deal with underage customers who are not aware. They can tap the sign and say, "Sorry, this is the law, I cannot assist you." The proposed requirement to display a sign is, as I said, analogous to the requirement under the tobacco regulations to display a sign about the sale of tobacco products.

Mr Speaker, we are concerned that the breadth of the definition of "knife" in the Crimes Act may result in the obligation to erect the proposed signs being imposed inappropriately. For example, it is possible that a person selling plastic knives or a food outlet serving knives for the consumption of food, such as a McDonald's outlet, would need to erect the proposed signs if the bill were enacted in its current form.

To avoid any ambiguity or inappropriate application, I will be moving a government amendment to the bill to provide for exclusion from the proposed section 497 of a person or knife of a kind specified in or ascertained in accordance with the regulations. The amendment will provide sufficient flexibility to prevent any inappropriate application of the obligation to put up a proposed sign. But the bill as it stands is generally supportable and I will move that amendment in the detail stage.

MR STANHOPE (Leader of the Opposition) (6.22): As the Attorney-General has indicated, Mr Rugendyke's bill is designed to complement the 1998 amendment of the Crimes Act which makes it an offence to possess a knife or sell knives to minors. As a bit of background, prior to 1987 sections 493 to 500 of the Crimes Act dealt with the possession of offensive weapons or disabling substances. These provisions were rewritten in 1987 as sections 493 and 494. An offensive weapon was then defined as anything made or adapted for use in causing bodily injury or intended for that use by the person who has it in his or her possession. The other sections were omitted as unnecessary.

The 1998 amendments inserted the current sections 496 and 497 about the possession of knives and the sale of knives to minors. It was felt that the definition of "offensive weapon" was not clear enough to cover a knife. Section 496, which is about possession, includes a reasonable excuse defence but section 497, about the sale of knives to minors, is an absolute offence. The amendment by Mr Rugendyke in 1998 defined knives as a knife blade, a razor blade or any other blade but not including a knife of a class or description excluded from this definition by the regulations. To date, there are no regulations made under this section of the act.

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