Mr DEAN ( Windermere ) - Madam President, there is one thing that I commend this Government for and that is their attitude towards road safety and those people out there who are doing the wrong thing. They are continually looking at ways to improve road safety and support the police in moving forward. Of course, I will be supporting this bill.

I will talk a little further on some of the issues raised during the Committee stage of the bill. What I want to say is that disqualified driving is an interesting issue and that alone is enough reason for me to support this without the other serious offences for which clamping can occur. I have often been concerned about the attitude of the courts in relation to disqualified driving. In my view - and I referred to it here recently in this Chamber - when a person has been disqualified from driving by an order of a court, for that person then to turn round and drive while disqualified is contemptuous behaviour. I have often worried about why the courts, when disqualified drivers come back before them, have treated them with some leniency. I would have thought it was one area that judges and magistrates would be absolutely severe on at all times. As the statistics show, it is those drivers who in many instances are involved in accidents resulting in serious injuries and fatalities. There are too many of them involved in my view. Anything that we can do to get those people off the roads and to stop them committing offences is important.

The other point I want to make is on penalties. When we look at ways to deter people from committing offences we always look at increasing the financial burden or incarceration. I would like to know what the statistics say about that, whether or not that really does have much of an impact. I would think that the statistics would show that increased penalties and increased incarceration has very little impact on many people. So it would be interesting to get those statistics. I do not know of any evidence that has been produced anywhere to show that it has had an impact because if you take drink-driving, for instance, the police will tell us that there are probably more drink-drivers on our roads now than there ever have been. That should not be the case. If increased penalties or increased incarceration is having an impact, you would think that we would be seeing less drink-driving on our roads. But that is not the case in my opinion and from what I read and what I hear.

Mr Parkinson - There has been enhancement in detection as well.

Mr DEAN - You are right, of course there has been and with the changes in law that occur, there has been a lot of enhancement made and more police in some cases and probably more attention given because of things that were happening and so on. So you are right, there are other things that lead to more persons being caught out.

Mr Wilkinson - Changes in legislation as to ability to intercept cars. That was a big reason.

Mr DEAN - Yes, random breath testing, just pulling anybody up for anything. That had a huge impact on people being caught for driving under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol. One of the best weapons I think that police were able to get in probably the last century was being able to pull up any vehicle without having to have reasonable cause for doing so.

Mr Wilkinson - Or even intercept a driver after the driving had been completed.

Mr DEAN - That is right.

Mr Wilkinson - You probably prosecuted such a case.

Mr DEAN - Yes, I have prosecuted a number of cases for that sort of offence. Some of the things that happen are interesting. We need to look at other avenues for deterring people from committing offences and I think this is one of them. Clamping a vehicle where the owner and/or the driver of the vehicle will see that vehicle in a clamped state and not be able to drive it will, one would hope, deter them from wanting to drive whilst disqualified or unlicensed. I hope that we do not see an increase in motor vehicle stealing as a result of this. I guess we will have to wait and see. Some people will drive, whatever the situation is.

In the legislation there is an out where special hardship occurs. If the police clamp a vehicle and the owner of the vehicle is able to make a special hardship case, then they can go before a magistrate and the magistrate can simply have the vehicle unclamped and impose what other penalties need to be imposed.

Penalties are as much about deterrence as they are about punishment and, in this instance, it is about deterring, not only deterring the person who has committed the offence from driving but probably others, mates, friends or what have you, who would see the vehicle in that state. It probably would become quite a deterrent in this aspect, apart from the punishment process. It is an interesting one.

When I spoke to the Police Association about this legislation they were quite content with it but they made the point that, as with all new legislation that comes in, it normally imposes more work on the police. It is more for them to do, more for them to be involved with, more legislation for them to understand and it takes a lot of their time away from doing other things that they should be doing.

I am very pleased to see the legislation here and I do not agree with the member for Mersey in any way whatsoever. Having been a police officer for 35 years, I recognise that we need to do everything that we possibly can to take away from police those extra burdens that new legislation creates for them. I think it is wonderful legislation here, to cause a person, whose vehicle has been clamped, the extra inconvenience of going to a police station, getting their key, going and unclamping their vehicle and then taking the clamp back to the police station. I support the legislation all the way. If the person does not do that within 10 days, the police can then go along and unclamp the vehicle themselves and take the clamp and take it back to the police station. The offenders also have to make sure the police station is open and that it is during working hours, so that is another inconvenience for them. I support that part of the legislation and I will probably say a little more about it in the Committee stage.

A lot of States currently are increasing penalties in relation to road safety issues. Most of you would have read or heard about the new legislation that Victoria has just put into place. And what happened in Victoria? They passed the legislation one day and put it into place almost the next day.

This legislation was spoken of in Victoria on a Friday when I was in Melbourne, and it was to commence on Monday morning, first thing Monday morning. So in three days of this legislation being publicised and the people getting to know about it, it is in place and is going to be enforced and no period for people to get used to the new legislation. It relates not to the clamping of vehicles but to road safety. You obey or you pay, they say. They are going to stringently police these laws. Drivers may not use a mobile phone unless it is hands free et cetera. Then there is an interesting one; they can use a navigation device only if it is fitted in and a part of the vehicle. That will cause an inconvenience for a lot of people, including my son.

All children under seven must wear a child restraint and be in a booster seat. The driver cannot overtake or do a U-turn across a single white line. That is an interesting one. Perhaps this State might look at some of those things because a lot of the public out there do not know the rules in relation to a single white line. Victoria are saying now that you cannot do a U-turn across them, that you cannot cross them.

Ms Forrest - You can cross them to turn into your driveway or a street.

Mr DEAN - It depends where they are. They are not normally in those places.

Ms Forrest - They are outside my place.

Mr Hall - Through you, Madam President - the honourable member was just talking about the navigation device. Does that mean that you cannot buy a retrofit navigation device, is that what they are saying?

Mr DEAN - Victoria are saying that unless it is fitted in as part of the vehicle, has come standard with the vehicle, fitted into the vehicle, it is part of the vehicle, you cannot use it.

Mr Hall - A lot of hire cars have retrofitted ones like that, and taxis.

Mr DEAN - It will be interesting to see if we take up some of those issues.

Mr Parkinson - Don't believe all you read in the press.

Mr DEAN - Motorcyclists cannot have a child under eight years of age as a pillion passenger.

Mr Parkinson - They probably mean hands free.

Mr DEAN - The driver must make sure all passengers are wearing seatbelts et cetera. I think that we have that rule here now. We are all getting serious about road safety rules and regulations and laws, and that is good.

The minister asked me for my opinion on this legislation some time ago, and I said I would need to be satisfied that access for emergency vehicles such as fire and ambulance was not blocked by the clamped vehicle.

If a vehicle is clamped and it is in a driveway right next to a house and there is a fire then those situations could occur. The police would respond fairly quickly I would think if that were the case to try to get the vehicle out or unclamp it. There are things that will need to be put into place.

The member for Murchison referred to the death of a relative and she is right, it is something that you never forget. I can recall the death of my brother in a vehicle crash that should never have occurred. It occurred as the result of the driver and he was a passenger. The driver was acting irresponsibly at the time. I never forget. It was excessive speed on a country road. I was a police officer here in Hobart, I was told to go to the hospital to meet my brother who was arriving after having been involved in an accident. I arrived and noticed that it was the country ambulance at the time, the Oatlands ambulance. As soon as I arrived the ambulance driver jumped out of the vehicle and told the staff he had a DOA on board. I recall that as though it happened yesterday and I remember dissolving into tears and losing control of myself because I knew exactly who it was and what was happening. Protocols have changed since then because I made a complaint about it, when I had the time to do so, and things changed about how they would pass that information on and watching where people are et cetera. It was a tragic situation and I will never forget it. That is another reason why I support road safety strategies and I will always do that. It is very important. After 35 years as a serving police officer and having passed on untold death messages to parents and families of a loved one being killed, a brother, sister, son, daughter, it really makes you think of the laws and the things we ought to be doing to ensure that people do not have to suffer these terrible atrocities we are currently seeing.

I was going to mention the position that the member for Nelson was involved in yesterday and I think that sends a very strong message to all of us. I think it was a disqualified driver - had been disqualified but unlicensed at the time and another tragic experience we can all learn from. There are some issues I will probably raise during the Committee stage.