Northern Territory Second Reading Speeches Northern Territory Second Reading Speeches[Index] [Search] [Bill] [Help]
| Madam Speaker, I move that the bill be now read a second time. Madam Speaker, the bill I introduce today will implement another important phase of the government’s Road Safety Package. The bill creates offences for driving under the influence of drugs and powers to require blood tests, in the case of accidents or where the police officer has reasonable cause to suspect a person is driving under the influence of drugs. National drug taking data reveals that 87% of drivers drove soon after using drugs (Darke et al 2003).. Recent drug use studies have also shown that cannabinoids are present in a significant proportion of drivers killed and injured in road accidents (Lenne 2004). And, results from the Victorian drug testing program after 12 months of operation reveal that one car driver in 40, and one truck driver in 69, are driving under the influence of drugs other than alcohol. NT Police has advised that a pilot study carried out in the Territory as part of the Drug Use Monitoring in Australia (DUMA) project, revealed that 29% of people detained by police for driving offences tested positive to illicit drugs (Road Safety Task Force Report). Madam Speaker, there has been a number of serious accidents in the Northern Territory, some involving fatalities, where the police know drugs were a feature of the accident but have not been able to confirm suspicions or press charges because the Northern Territory has not previously had the power to test those involved in crashes for drugs. Currently, the power to test blood from those involved in crashes exist for alcohol but not for drugs. The bill will address this shortcoming. All other states and territories in Australia have moved progressively over many years to introduce strong measures to send a clear message that it is unacceptable to take drugs and drive. The Northern Territory is the only jurisdiction in Australia that does not have the power to test blood from those involved in crashes for drugs. This is unacceptable. Why should the wider community in the Territory have to put up with drivers taking drugs and driving on our roads, with apparent impunity from the consequences of their behaviour? I am also aware of a culture in the NT that exploits the fact that police do not have the power to require a person at high risk due to drug taking to submit to a blood test. The key road safety measures to be implemented as part of this amendment bill are: · provision for the collection of blood samples to test for drugs and other substances from persons involved in motor vehicle accidents. · power for police to use roadside saliva tests as a preliminary screening test for the presence of certain drugs. · power for police to saliva screen test a person whose driving behaviour is not related to alcohol, or in a case where an officer has reasonable cause to suspect that the person is driving under the influence of a drug. · police can arrest persons returning a positive saliva test, or refusing a saliva test for the purposes of a drug test. · following strong representations from the NT Trucking Association, police will have the power to random roadside saliva screen and require a blood test from drivers of heavy vehicles over 4.5 tonnes gross vehicle mass. For police to require a blood test where an alcohol test and a saliva test are inconclusive, however, the police officer must reasonably believe that an offence has been committed. This situation should occur where the police officer believes the person, by continuing to drive, would pose a danger to the public. The police officer would be required to arrest the person for the purposes of a blood test. A person arrested for the purposes of a blood test may be unable to drive for 24 hours following the test. The person may be subject to an immediate suspension of their driver’s licence for 24 hours. The suspension is unappealable and the police may issue the person with a notice establishing the suspension. A list of drugs is included in a schedule to the Traffic Regulations. The first part, Part A, will establish drugs prohibited to be used in any capacity whilst driving. The second part, Part B, comprises the prohibited drugs morphine, methadone and amphetamines used in the treatment of narcolepsy and attention deficit disorder. However, a defence prosecution will be available if these drugs have been taken in accordance with directions from a medical practitioner. The defendant must be able to satisfy the court that he or she was in the care of a medical practitioner and the drug was taken in accordance with a prescription or specified dosage. The defence will not be available if the prosecution establishes that the level of impairment observed was not consistent with the specific dosage. The bill provides that drug analysis results can only be used for the purposes of offences against the Traffic Act and not in evidence proceeding some of the Misuse of Drugs Act. The right of an individual is also protected in circumstances where police compel the person to undergo a blood test. Currently, when a blood sample is taken to determine the blood alcohol content level in a person’s blood, the person taking the sample may make approximately half the sample available to the person from whom it was taken for independent testing. The provision is now also applied in cases where samples are taken for drug screening purposes. It is intended that first offences of drug driving will operate in a similar fashion to the recently introduced penalties for low-level drink-driving offences; that is, a first offence may only attract a traffic infringement notice issued by police. The TIN will be counted as a first offence, and second or subsequent offences will be subject to the same penalties as for low-level drink-driving offences on repeat occasions. The penalties for persons charged with drive under the influence, DUI offences, will be the same as for exceed 0.08 blood alcohol content penalties. DUI offences are based on existing offences in the Traffic Act and requires police to prove impairment in the court. During drafting of the drug-driving provisions, it became necessary to rewrite Part V of the Traffic Act that deals with blood alcohol content testing offences and penalties. The new Part V recreates the drink-driving provisions from the current act. The only major changes in regard to applying the two strike policy agreed for low-range drink-driving penalties to zero alcohol drivers - passenger vehicle drivers, drivers under the age of 25 who have not held their licence for three years, and truck drivers - who will be subject to licence sanctions should they re-offend within three years of the first offence. This will place these drivers on the same footing as other motorists attracting low range 0.05 to 0.08 blood alcohol content offences. The redraft of Part V presented in the bill has resulted in much clearer enunciation of alcohol- and drug-driving provisions. I am sure honourable members will support this important road safety initiative announced by the Chief Minister in November last year. The community and, in particular our children, have a right to expect that they should be safe from drink- and drug-drivers on the road, and that they have the support of the law when it comes to the appropriate penalties for those who transgress. Madam Speaker, I commend the bill to honourable members and I table both the bill and the explanatory memorandum. Debate adjourned. |