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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1997 Week 13 Hansard (3 December) . . Page.. 4489 ..

MR MOORE (continuing):

Ms Tucker has put to this Assembly an important piece of legislation which, if it were passed by this Assembly today and gazetted appropriately, would result over the Christmas period or not too long after the Christmas period in a reduction of speed in our suburbs. I think that would be a positive contribution. It may well mean that not everybody would do exactly 50 kilometres an hour, because we know that drivers make judgments about the sort of speed they do, given the sorts of road conditions they have. Some drivers are better than other drivers and judgments are made about the sorts of road conditions in which we drive.

Indeed, since this legislation was put on the table, I have regularly checked the sort of speed that I tend to do while I am driving through suburban areas. In the vast majority of cases, I tend to do 40 kilometres an hour. In some spots on suburban roads, I tend to drive at around 60 kilometres an hour. I do so where the roads are broader, where there is good vision. But it still seems to me that the message that is clearly sent out by a piece of legislation like this is that this Assembly believes and this community believes, that it is appropriate for us to slow down when we are in suburban areas. It is a very positive message. It is a message about the safety of our children, in particular, and the elderly. It is about protecting people. As such, I think it is a very positive move.

The way this legislation is framed - that is, the default speed - would allow us to facilitate flow-through traffic on what I would refer to as minor arterial roads, that is, roads going through the centre of a suburb that carry large amounts of traffic. Limestone Avenue is an example. Currently, as I recall, the speed limit is 60 kilometres an hour. The signs could remain there at 60 kilometres an hour. The traffic on that road could well flow through at 60 kilometres an hour, whereas the speed limit on the roads that run off it, appropriately, would be mostly 50 kilometres an hour. Anzac Parade, which runs off it, is a very broad road with three lanes each way. Perhaps it could carry traffic at 70 or 80 kilometres an hour. I think there is room still to facilitate the flow through of traffic at an appropriate speed but, at the same time, to protect our citizens in this way. It is for those sorts of reasons that I will be supporting this very sensible piece of legislation.

MR WHITECROSS (6.03): The Labor Opposition regards this proposal as part of a debate which is currently going on in all States and Territories in Australia in relation to national road rules. It is a difficult issue; it is an issue which all jurisdictions are grappling with, despite the very significant tensions within it. I, for one, and the Labor Opposition in general, am disappointed that the Greens have chosen the approach of trying to push through a Bill in the ACT in advance of the process that is going on. It is, indeed, an important issue; but it is a much more complicated issue than one might gather from the kind of argument that Ms Tucker advanced in relation to this matter.

Ms Tucker states something which is a simple fact, that is, that if you drive at a slower speed you will have a shorter stopping distance and, therefore, if for any given distance in front of you there is a potential pedestrian, cyclist or vehicle, a slower speed will reduce your chances of colliding with that pedestrian, cyclist or vehicle. Of course, that is a simple fact; there is no question about that. But that is not the issue we are debating today. The issue we are debating today is whether Ms Tucker's Bill will result in an improvement in road safety in suburban streets.

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