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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 6 Hansard (18 June) . . Page.. 1756 ..

MS TUCKER: Mr Kaine, is it the responsibility of government to provide taxi rank facilities for taxi rank areas that are designated, and do you review facilities from time to time to make sure they are appropriate and safe?

MR KAINE: It is clearly the responsibility of government, Mr Speaker, to provide taxi ranks. They are on our public streets. Just as we provide loading zones and other commercial spaces, yes, it is our obligation to provide them. Whether we review them frequently or not, I do not know; but I will take on notice the question as to how often a review of the provision of taxi ranks is carried out and come back to Ms Tucker.

MS TUCKER: I have a supplementary question. Is the Minister aware that the provision of sufficient taxi rank space has become an issue in Manuka? Can he explain why a request from the chief executive of Aerial Taxis to the director of City Services to reorganise parking arrangements to meet the need was met with a response from government that sounded like it would improve the current arrangements, but it would be more likely to happen quickly if Aerial Taxis did it themselves and funded it?

MR KAINE: Mr Speaker, I have no knowledge of the circumstances that Ms Tucker outlines. I will certainly find out whether any such proposal has been made; whether, indeed, that was the response; and what, if anything, the Government should be doing to respond to it.

MS REILLY: Mr Speaker, my question is to Mr Humphries as Minister for Land and Planning. Minister, can you explain why you have expanded the scope of the LAPACs, thereby reducing the three current groups to two?

MR HUMPHRIES: Yes, very simply, Mr Speaker. As members know, I commissioned a consultant's report which reported in about October or November last year and which made recommendations about a number of changes to the LAPACs. That included doing away with elections, having members of LAPACs appointed by the Minister, and other recommendations which found little favour among community groups, members of LAPACs or the Government. As a result, I was unhappy with those recommendations.

I subsequently brought together a working party, consisting, in the majority, of members of existing LAPACs, to give advice about the way in which LAPACs should be structured in the future. There was a package of recommendations and, broadly speaking, the Government has accepted those recommendations. I do not recall whether the three into two was one of those recommendations, but I do recall that it was imperative that the Government be able to provide for an extension of the LAPAC concept into other parts of the ACT, including South Canberra and Belconnen, or parts of Belconnen. Obviously, it is not possible to do that at the same level of cost if we replicate relatively small structures throughout the whole of the rest of Canberra. Essentially, the Government has acted on the basis of recommendations made by the working party, a majority of whose members were members of existing LAPACs.

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