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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 1999 Week 9 Hansard (1 September) . . Page.. 2743 ..

MR QUINLAN (continuing):

considerable advantages in terms of the environment and access to land in the train line corridor. Maglev is tomorrow's technology while Speedrail is today's. Speedrail will commence its slide into obsolescence immediately upon construction. Nevertheless, it is the lower cost option and therefore may have more chance of being assessed as viable.

The ALP is also very interested in development of the airport within the constraints, such as the impact upon the environment and upon the people of Canberra themselves. We want to see economic development for the ultimate benefit of the people and not at the ultimate expense of the people. We see great value in continued development of a regional transport hub. There is great potential for Canberra to enhance its position as a regional centre. A developing airport, the potential of a VFT and the probability of improved road access all provide the potential for growth of a regional product distribution centre with or without the train. We certainly hope that the train will arrive, but we have witnessed some scepticism and had some back of the envelope numbers published which argue against it. Nevertheless, a well-developed distribution centre has the potential to increase local production of the items that are distributed.

As well as stimulating international tourism to Canberra, the airport could allow Canberra to supplant, in part, Sydney for some rural folk who want or need to travel to the big city. If we could attract commuter traffic to increased services into and out of Canberra we could see people coming for more specialised medical services, legal and financial services, shopping and recreation. If you live in Dubbo and you want to see a podiatrist, do a bit of shopping and then go to see the latest movie available, where do you go? Sydney has been the conventional answer. There could be an alternative that does not have all of the characteristics of Sydney, those characteristics of Sydney that some of us find unpleasant. A number of Canberra enterprises would benefit - the podiatrist in Braddon, the shopping malls, the big screen theatres - from being accessible for country folk by jumping into one of Hazelton's or Kendell's aircraft or by catching the local Murrays' bus.

I do believe that there is a point of critical mass beyond which growth in transport and business activity will occur automatically. I would like to see detailed alternative plans developed for Canberra as a regional centre and as a transport and distribution centre. Until then, I strongly support the introduction of the very fast train, quite obviously. I also support the rational development of the airport, both as an international terminal and as a regional terminal. I further suggest that there be plans drawn up for Canberra's access roads to complement the airport expansion and, hopefully, the arrival of the very fast train.

Let me devote just a little time to the second part of the motion. I have to say that the action suggested by Mr Hird in the second part of the motion is likely to be an exercise in futility. Would any speaker from the Government who follows me please give this Assembly some assurance that communicating with any Minister in the Howard Government on the importance of these developments to the capital region would make one jot of difference? I would like to hear that. I would like to see that. Has there been some 180-degree change in the attitude of Mr Howard and his Government? That is Mr John Howard of Kirribilli, the one who will not reside in the capital of the nation of which he is the Prime Minister.

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