This speech was delivered on 13/08/2014 in the NSW Upper House. You can read the full debate online here.
Mr DAVID SHOEBRIDGE [9.51 p.m.]: I make a contribution to debate on the Road Transport Amendment (Mandatory Alcohol Interlock Program) Bill 2014 and state at the outset that The Greens support the bill. This is the second alcohol- and drug-related driving bill to come before the House this week. I refer to the comments I made in debate on behalf of The Greens in relation to the need for legislative provisions that deter drivers from consuming alcohol and/or drugs before getting behind the wheel of a vehicle and by reason of intoxication turn that vehicle into a lethal weapon. Indeed, the Minister, in his second reading speech, referred to statistics which show that if a person driving a vehicle has a prescribed content of alcohol in their bloodstream of 1.5 or above they are 25 times more likely to cause an accident than they would if they were sober.
Unfortunately, a number of people, despite being found guilty of an offence of driving with a prescribed content of alcohol in their bloodstream, will continue to offend. Others are dependent upon a motor vehicle for their transport, particularly in regional New South Wales where the loss of a licence can be devastating to a person’s career and their ability to access services that people in the city, with access to public transport, take for granted. The bill moves the law from a voluntary engagement with the interlock program to a mandatory engagement. The bill provides that an interlock device will be mandatory for a person who has a motor vehicle or has access to a motor vehicle and is convicted of a second or subsequent offence of driving with the prescribed content of alcohol in their bloodstream, or if that person is convicted of a first offence of driving with a high prescribed content of alcohol.
The bill puts in place two stage licence conditions. At the lower end, the range runs from a minimum disqualification period of one month to a maximum disqualification of three months. At the higher end, where someone is convicted of a second or subsequent offence for driving with a high-range prescribed content of alcohol in their bloodstream, the range runs from a minimum disqualification period of nine months to a maximum disqualification of 12 months. The bill also puts in minimum interlock periods to be imposed by the courts.
The minimum interlock period for an offender who is caught driving with a low-range prescribed content of alcohol on his or her second or subsequent offence is 12 months and it rises to a maximum interlock period of 48 months if the offender is convicted of a second or subsequent offence where the offender has a high-range prescribed content of alcohol. At the higher end of the range an offender can be 12 months without a licence, a complete disqualification, and then another four years with an interlock device fitted to his or vehicle or a vehicle the offender has access to.
It will be the responsibility of the offender to pay for, install and maintain the interlock device. This would have raised substantial concerns as to the equity of this arrangement were it not for the fact that the Minister advised in his second reading speech that the Act will continue to include provision for a financial assistance scheme to support program participants who have difficulty paying for interlock services. The financial assistance will include both concession rate fees for eligible cardholders and additional limited duration fee subsidy for offenders in severe financial hardship. With those checks and balances, which ensure that it will not be an utterly inequitable and complete removal of an offender’s licence if he or she has very limited financial means, and consistent with an excellent policy direction in seeking to deter people from repeat drink-driving, The Greens support the bill.