❓ Mr. Francis questions the Minister for Police about the Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill 2012, and the Minister responds by outlining the bill's intent to increase penalties for fleeing police and provide legal protections for police officers engaged in emergency driving.
AnsweredQoN 661Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
ROAD
TRAFFIC (MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS) BILL 2012
661. Mr J.M. FRANCIS to the
Minister for Police:
It has been four years, one month and two weeks since the
Liberal–National government took office and in that time I have been proud to vote on some historic and important
law and order bills to protect the Western Australian community —
Several members interjected.
The
SPEAKER : I do not need to hear from you, member for Girrawheen. I
formally call you to order for the second time today. Member for Joondalup, I
formally call you to order for the second time today. Member for Cockburn, I
know that you are in the house.
Mr J.M. FRANCIS :
With all this in mind, could the minister please advise why the government has
introduced the Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill 2012 and its intent
if it becomes law?
TRAFFIC (MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS) BILL 2012
661. Mr J.M. FRANCIS to the
Minister for Police:
It has been four years, one month and two weeks since the
Liberal–National government took office and in that time I have been proud to vote on some historic and important
law and order bills to protect the Western Australian community —
Several members interjected.
The
SPEAKER : I do not need to hear from you, member for Girrawheen. I
formally call you to order for the second time today. Member for Joondalup, I
formally call you to order for the second time today. Member for Cockburn, I
know that you are in the house.
Mr J.M. FRANCIS :
With all this in mind, could the minister please advise why the government has
introduced the Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill 2012 and its intent
if it becomes law?
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for this question. Two weeks ago, the
government introduced the Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill 2012 to
this house. I hope that this bill will pass through the house this week. I
appreciate that those opposite have expressed their support for this legislation.
The bill reflects the reality that fleeing police is an
incredibly irresponsible and dangerous thing to do. It puts police in an
incredibly difficult position in which they need to determine in a split second
whether they should commence a pursuit, let them escape or continue or break
off a pursuit. T wo very strong
considerations in developing this legislation were front and foremost in our
minds. Firstly, there is very
compelling evidence that penalties imposed for these offences simply do not
reflect the extreme danger that these actions pose to the community of Western
Australia. In the six-month period from September last year to March this year, there were 139 police pursuits.
Eighty-three per cent of those pursuits involved serial offenders. In other
words, 108 of the offenders involved had prior charges for traffic-related
offences of some kind, and 56 per cent had a prior charge for reckless driving.
Given the extremely dangerous nature of this conduct, members might expect that
offenders of this nature would indeed face terms of imprisonment for their actions, but that is not the
case.
I have been able to identify 75 offenders from the six-month
period who so far have been convicted and sentenced for reckless driving in the
course of a pursuit. Fifty-one of those offenders—more than two-thirds
of the group of people who were fleeing police and driving recklessly as they
did so—avoided an immediate term of imprisonment and instead were given
fines, community-based orders or suspended sentences. This government's
view is that these are not appropriate sentences for people who recklessly flee
police; the sentences are not appropriate because they do not recognise the
extremely wrongful nature of these actions, and do not in any way, shape or
form recognise the dangerousness of those actions and the fact that these are
recidivist offenders going back on the road and putting lives at risk. Those
kinds of weak penalties do not recognise the actions of those particular people.
We need to ensure that these people are put behind bars where they can no
longer endanger other road users. Under our government's legislation,
the dangerous, irresponsible and recidivist offenders will spend time behind
bars; a minimum of six months up to a maximum of five years. The second part of
this legislation recognises that police do not have a defence that covers
serious offences under the Road Traffic Act. In other words, when a police
officer is following the relevant police policies, they can still face charges.
Police officers under this legislation, if they are substantially complying
with the guidelines around emergency driving and it was reasonable in the
circumstances and in the public interest for them to be driving in that manner,
will have a defence to any serious charge arising out of their emergency
driving procedures. This legislation therefore includes charges of dangerous
driving, reckless driving, dangerous driving causing bodily harm and dangerous
driving causing death.
I hope that this legislation will send a very simple message
to people: if a police officer asks you to stop—stop! Do not put your
life at risk. Do not put the police officer's life at risk. And do not
endanger innocent road users and other members of the community; please do not
put their lives at risk either. If you refuse to stop when police call you to
stop and instead drive away recklessly, you will go to jail.
government introduced the Road Traffic (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill 2012 to
this house. I hope that this bill will pass through the house this week. I
appreciate that those opposite have expressed their support for this legislation.
The bill reflects the reality that fleeing police is an
incredibly irresponsible and dangerous thing to do. It puts police in an
incredibly difficult position in which they need to determine in a split second
whether they should commence a pursuit, let them escape or continue or break
off a pursuit. T wo very strong
considerations in developing this legislation were front and foremost in our
minds. Firstly, there is very
compelling evidence that penalties imposed for these offences simply do not
reflect the extreme danger that these actions pose to the community of Western
Australia. In the six-month period from September last year to March this year, there were 139 police pursuits.
Eighty-three per cent of those pursuits involved serial offenders. In other
words, 108 of the offenders involved had prior charges for traffic-related
offences of some kind, and 56 per cent had a prior charge for reckless driving.
Given the extremely dangerous nature of this conduct, members might expect that
offenders of this nature would indeed face terms of imprisonment for their actions, but that is not the
case.
I have been able to identify 75 offenders from the six-month
period who so far have been convicted and sentenced for reckless driving in the
course of a pursuit. Fifty-one of those offenders—more than two-thirds
of the group of people who were fleeing police and driving recklessly as they
did so—avoided an immediate term of imprisonment and instead were given
fines, community-based orders or suspended sentences. This government's
view is that these are not appropriate sentences for people who recklessly flee
police; the sentences are not appropriate because they do not recognise the
extremely wrongful nature of these actions, and do not in any way, shape or
form recognise the dangerousness of those actions and the fact that these are
recidivist offenders going back on the road and putting lives at risk. Those
kinds of weak penalties do not recognise the actions of those particular people.
We need to ensure that these people are put behind bars where they can no
longer endanger other road users. Under our government's legislation,
the dangerous, irresponsible and recidivist offenders will spend time behind
bars; a minimum of six months up to a maximum of five years. The second part of
this legislation recognises that police do not have a defence that covers
serious offences under the Road Traffic Act. In other words, when a police
officer is following the relevant police policies, they can still face charges.
Police officers under this legislation, if they are substantially complying
with the guidelines around emergency driving and it was reasonable in the
circumstances and in the public interest for them to be driving in that manner,
will have a defence to any serious charge arising out of their emergency
driving procedures. This legislation therefore includes charges of dangerous
driving, reckless driving, dangerous driving causing bodily harm and dangerous
driving causing death.
I hope that this legislation will send a very simple message
to people: if a police officer asks you to stop—stop! Do not put your
life at risk. Do not put the police officer's life at risk. And do not
endanger innocent road users and other members of the community; please do not
put their lives at risk either. If you refuse to stop when police call you to
stop and instead drive away recklessly, you will go to jail.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.