Mapp Wayne: Land Transport Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Mapp Wayne: Land Transport Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:626;Page:21368] 
Dr WAYNE MAPP (National—North Shore) 
: 
 I rise to speak to clauses 1 and 2 the title and commencement. The interesting part here is the commencement date itself. Under clause 2 there is a complex formula of which provisions come into force at which times. For instance the legislation as a whole comes into force on 16 January 2006 which is basically 6 months from now but certain parts of it can come into force on an earlier date. I ask the Minister of Transport why the special rules that we have now introduced relating to taxi-drivers which are covered by clause 13 have to wait until 16 January to come into force instead of coming into force at the time of the royal assent. That was the original proposal but now it seems as I read this that clause 13 will come into force on 16 January 2006. It may be that it is intended by Order in Council to bring that portion into force at a different date possibly an earlier date. I would like some assurance from the Minister that that would be the case. 
For the moment he has effectively created a loophole whereby those who have been convicted of serious offences would be able to continue driving over the following 6 months. I would have thought that on legislation of this nature when the rules on this kind of issue are being changed particularly with the very loose appeal procedure that is now being approved—well it is actually not an appeal procedure really; one just has to apply to the director and that will suffice—the public are exposed to unnecessary risk. This Parliament based on the submissions that its committee received wants to give a very clear signal that passengers in taxis in particular deserve special protection. Parliament has established what is overall apart from that review procedure a rigorous test an exemplary test even whereby persons guilty of various serious offences ought not to be able to drive taxis. But as I read the legislation that does not come into force for another 6 months and I have to ask why we would do that. Why would we allow someone convicted literally of murder or of various serious sexual offences to continue to drive over the next 6 months and potentially place people at risk? As a Parliament we are saying that that is not possible and that those people ought to have their licences removed. Presumably that means now not 6 months from now. So I want some form of explanation as to why—and maybe I have misread clause 2 because it is relatively complexly constructed—that is not the case. I would be pleased if the Minister could give a direction on it. 
Other parts of the legislation I understand have implementation processes involved in them and new rules—logbook requirements etc.—have to be developed. One would expect that to take some period of time. After all it is not simply a question of people changing patterns; they also have to complete new logbooks essentially to comply with the legislation for the future and clearly people need time to produce those logbooks and so on and so forth. This is an area in which Parliament says upon balancing public safety and the interests of the drivers public safety takes priority. I believe if we are saying that as strictly and as seriously as we are—and it is a substantial test; I recognise that—then that part of the legislation ought to come into force at the time of the royal assent or as soon as possible thereafter. I would appreciate an explanation from the Minister on that point. 
Clause 1 agreed to. 
The question was put that the amendments set out on Supplementary Order Paper 375 in the name of the Hon Pete Hodgson to clause 2 be agreed to.