Page 1482 - Week 04 - Thursday, 25 March 2010

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


from an account held by the fine defaulter and pay it to the court. Deductions can be in the form of a lump sum or instalments.

The court may also order the seizure and subsequent sale of personal property belonging to the fine defaulter. Property seized under a property seizure order cannot include clothing, bedding or other necessities of life. This means, for example, a refrigerator used to store food could not be seized. However, if a fine defaulter, for example, has two fridges—say, one for food and a bar fridge used solely for drinks—the bar fridge could be seized as it is a surplus item and not a necessity of life.

The bill sets out that any property seized under a property seizure order must be held for at least 28 days before it can be sold. This allows time for either the fine defaulter or another person to apply to have that property returned. A fine defaulter can apply to have property returned on the grounds that the sale of the property would result in undue hardship or would be unfair. Any other person can apply to have property returned on these grounds or because they claim a legal or equitable interest in the property.

If any of the orders I have previously mentioned are not appropriate for a particular fine defaulter, the court may make a voluntary community work order. This is a progressive step in the fine enforcement framework and allows a fine defaulter to discharge a fine by performing community service work if the defaulter agrees to do so. Once they have agreed, a fine defaulter is bound by the order. This option is not available for fine defaulters who were convicted of a personal violence offence.

I am pleased to say that Volunteering ACT will work with the government to administer voluntary community work orders. Volunteering ACT will assess a fine defaulter, organise appropriate community work and report compliance or non-compliance with the order. Where a person undertakes work in accordance with this order, their fine will be discharged at the rate of $37.50 per hour. I believe this is a generous amount, considering that in New South Wales the rate a fine is discharged under a similar order is only $15 per hour.

The government recognises that people can sometimes experience extreme difficulty in paying a fine and in some circumstances it may not be appropriate to seek the imprisonment of a fine defaulter as a way of discharging a fine. This is why the new fine enforcement scheme allows the chief executive to remit a fine if no other fine enforcement order would be effective and extenuating circumstances warrant remission. This will only occur when all of the options I have mentioned have been exhausted.

Imprisonment is the ultimate penalty in criminal law and its use is not taken lightly. Where all appropriate fine enforcement action has been pursued to no avail and remission of a fine is not appropriate, the court may order the imprisonment of a fine defaulter. Where this occurs a fine will be discharged at the rate of $300 per day of imprisonment. This is an increase from the current $100 per day. If the fine defaulter was under the age of 18 when they committed the offence for which they were fined, the fine will be discharged at the rate of $500 per day of imprisonment.


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