Page 1554 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 12 August 1992
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Mr Wood: No, we have not.
MR DE DOMENICO: Yes, we have.
Mr Wood: I have not.
MR DE DOMENICO: If you were not, you should have been, because it has been on the drawing board, Mr Wood, and it has been talked about for a long time by the business community which you are saying is going to hold hands with you in joint ventures.
Mr Kaine: Do not talk about getting into bed with people.
MR DE DOMENICO: I realise that, Mr Kaine. We also need to talk about what is going to happen on the Acton Peninsula. That was not mentioned by Mr Wood or Mr Lamont. If we are to get real about urban renewal or urban infill or urban redevelopment, no matter what you call it, whatever is in vogue from day to day, we have to talk about places like the Acton Peninsula. I would be very anxious to find out once and for all what the Government's plans are.
Mr Kaine: What is the Government's agenda?
MR DE DOMENICO: We want an agenda for the Acton Peninsula. At a later time Mr Wood might want to answer that. Madam Speaker, the other thing to which Mr Lamont's speech referred was the importance of land use and public transport. Again, I recommend a wonderful article that was in the Trends magazine the other week. There is obviously a cart and horse debate in the matter of land use, public transport and redevelopment. One approach which appears to have been embraced by the ACT Government strategies paper, which came out some time ago, is that increasing density of population along the main transport corridors will, in time, swing the cost-benefit equation the way of options such as a dedicated busway or light rail. This approach emphasises the high costs and major financial commitment involved in light rail; but we heard nothing about light rail, from what I can recollect.
The other question that needs to be asked, Madam Speaker, is: Can Canberra afford to maintain its road system without loss of quality? Nothing was said about that. Road spending has been slashed, which is a good word to use; new capital spending is down, I believe, from $41.6m in 1991 to $18.3m in 1991-92; and maintenance and operation spending is down from $33m to about $30.9m. There are other questions that we need to address. An alternative approach that I talked about, before light rail, is that an enhanced transport system needs to come first. It is an essential catalyst in winning public transport for higher densities of land use. Here, there is a plea for wider consideration of the financial implications of the transport system itself, especially the potential for a higher rate of return to the Government on other urban infrastructure.
While talking about new proposals that we heard nothing about today, let us see the key elements of some of the new proposals. One is a modern, privately run, electric tram service connecting Gungahlin to the city centre via the Northbourne Avenue median strip, Flemington Road and Mitchell. Nothing was said about that. There is the potential for later extension of the tram system to Manuka, Belconnen and Woden. These are the sorts of issues that we have to reflect on.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .