Thursday 3rd April 2008
Mr FINCH  - It was all about the situation where you needed to carry your licence.  I was really concerned about people jumping from vehicle to vehicle and then needing to carry their licence.  There was also the issue of not being able to copy your licence and having to carry it on you at all times.  That was an example to me of us law-makers expecting the general public at all times to carry their driver's licence with them or face a penalty.  I see the inclusion of this in the bill is that the officers will be aware that when carrying out their duties they may see something that they think they need to question or investigate so they need to have their identification on them before they can proceed any further.  I just think it will become obvious to them as they change their thinking, as the general public had to with the carriage of licence and they will make sure that they have their identification with them to carry out their duties properly.

Mr PARKINSON - I appreciate those contributions.  I think the honourable member for Windermere capped it off by pointing out the main reason for the exception in the event.  First the requirement is they 'must produce'.  In the one-off unforeseen situation, where the ID is not on the person's person but they still need to gather the evidence that is present in front of them, it would be a travesty really if that evidence was lost simply because they were not able to produce their ID.  That is why it makes it clear that they can continue to perform, exercise his or her functions and powers despite the request, but then they still have to produce their ID within that time.