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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 4 Hansard (21 April) . . Page.. 1100 ..

MS TUCKER (continuing):

not seem to have any concept of what we are asking for, which is actually a comprehensive, integrated transport strategy for the ACT. Mr Speaker, that is what we have been asking for for quite a number of years.

Mr Smyth says the work has been done. Well, when John Langmore's committee looked at that, the report from his inquiry recommended that there be a future public transport option study. That has not been done. It also recommended the development and implementation of a detailed strategy of measures to facilitate the use of public transport and other non-car models of transport by Canberra residents, particularly including Gungahlin residents. That has not been done.

The development and implementation of a strategy to reduce the number of vehicles travelling between Gungahlin and Civic or other southern destinations, such as by encouraging employment opportunities in Gungahlin and restricting employment growth in Civic, has not been done. The development of a plan for an eastern ring-road from Gungahlin and the Barton Highway to central Canberra and the Monaro Highway is being looked at. Now, here we come to the ACT. The release and implementation of the ACT's integrated land use and transport strategy announced in 1997 has not been done.

Which work has been done, Mr Speaker? Maunsell happened. Maunsell has been criticised very loudly for the processes and results. That is why we have in this motion that we want to really look at why this Minister for the environment, this Minister who got behind the earth charter, thinks we do not need a full environmental impact assessment while we put a freeway through a nature park. It is all really very interesting. As for what I think about what Mr Humphries and Mr Smyth have said this afternoon, actually, I do not need to say. Anyone just needs to read Hansard and they will see that they have no idea about how smart cities deal with transport in 1999, moving into the new millennium.

Mr Speaker, these people are still in the 1960s. They say, "We will build a freeway and we will move people on roads". What happens to the freeway? We are going to get 80,000 or 100,000 people in Gungahlin. Where are they all going to end up when they drive in their cars? They are going to end up on Barry Drive, or maybe not. Maybe they are going to go through the Botanic Gardens, which was the original proposal that John Langmore's committee looked at and which was soundly rejected by most of the ACT community. What happens if you do, by some amazing feat, get a road going past the Botanic Gardens? Where are another 80,000 or whatever it is people going to park? That's fine; we build more car parks in the city, do we? Is this smart? It is just ridiculous. Of course we have to look at the broader ways of moving people around the city.

This Government claims to be clever, and this Government claims to be caring. They are showing that they are neither in this particular approach. I am very pleased that members are supporting the motion that I put today. I know that a lot of members of the community are also very pleased to see that at last we will get a good look at how we can manage to move people around this city in a better way.

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