Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 6 Hansard (18 June) . . Page.. 1755 ..

MR KAINE (continuing):

There are questions of lease purpose and technical questions associated with that, of course, because the land is already leased for some other purpose. Since that piece of land would, from memory, be big enough to take only about 44 heavy vehicles, there was a question of whether there would be more space required. The proposal includes the proposition that an adjoining property - which is also under lease but which I understand is vacant at the moment, although leased - would have to be taken over, in some fashion, by the proponent. That would then provide sufficient parking space for about 85 vehicles. There are ongoing negotiations as to whether or not it is possible to set up that particular park and to accept the proposal put in relation to it.

There is also a proposal for another park at Mitchell, but there are similar problems. The proponent is talking about a quite small block of land that would not accommodate a large number of trucks. However, negotiations are continuing on those proposals. There was a third one, and this is a major one, which would entail setting up a quite large facility near the airport. It would involve considerable expenditure on the part of the proponent and it would go much further than simply truck parking. My understanding is that it would involve a freight bay for transhipping road freight and perhaps a maintenance facility for heavy vehicles as well as the parking space. That, you can understand, involves some very complicated negotiations because the land, at the current time, is not zoned for such a purpose. Secondly, it is designated land, and, thirdly, of course, we have on the table the whole issue of the future of the airport, and that raises questions about the land surrounding it.

It is not for want of trying that no heavy vehicle park has yet been created. We are continuing to negotiate and we are hopeful that we will have at least some heavy truck parking available. I think the first and most likely cab off the rank is the one at Hume, and we are hoping to have that in place between July and September, or around about that period. There is also the question of a code of conduct by which heavy truck owners and operators will be obliged to operate, and that will be before the Assembly this week.

The second part of the question has to do with the economic viability. It is clearly not economically unviable, or we would not have people attempting to negotiate with us to provide this heavy truck parking. I believe it is economically viable. It is just a question of identifying the areas where the heavy trucks should be parked, where they can be parked, and what arrangements have to be entered into by the Government to facilitate such.

MS TUCKER: My question is for Mr Kaine, also. Mr Kaine, could you clarify this? Is it the responsibility of government to provide taxi rank facilities? Do you review facilities from time to time to make sure they are appropriate and safe?

MR KAINE: I am sorry; I did not hear that question, Mr Speaker. Ms Tucker speaks very softly.

MR SPEAKER: Could we have it again, Ms Tucker?

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . .