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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 7 Hansard (21 June) . . Page.. 2374 ..

MR SMYTH (continuing):

adopted-and that is a nice confirmation that we have it right-as the best initiative of any government since self-government. So we have the union on side on that one.

He then got to the fact that community schools might close. This is the end of community schooling as we know it. Name one community school in New South Wales that closed because of the introduction of a free school bus system. Simply name one. I do not believe that you can. I would be happy to hear the name of that school and we would then look into the conditions that might have forced such a school to close. I am not aware of any that closed in New South Wales because of the introduction of a free school bus system. You are not either, otherwise you would be trotting those names out.

Mr Berry finished by discussing our future legacy and how we had ignored ACTION. We have put a significant amount of effort and additional resources into ACTION over the years to try to get it to be the sort of bus service that it should be, and we are getting there. And we are getting there because the government, management and the unions have worked together to make it so.

Ms Tucker and others have said that we have ignored or run down public transport. We have put more money into it, we have extended the network, we have obtained some extra patronage and we will continue to support ACTION because we know that the people of Canberra want a public transport system. A lot of them actually do not use it, but they want to know that it is there should they actually need to use it.

Mr Corbell said that the Labor Party was not about putting a few dollars into somebody's pocket. Yet we know from Labor's polling, because we have seen the questions, that they were asking people, "How would you respond to just a little educational bonus that we might pay parents to help with school children?" It is hypocritical, saying, "We are not about that," when we know that they are out there asking such questions. It is so disingenuous that it is unbelievable.

Then his portrayal of our greenhouse initiatives as having been allocated only $180,000 in the budget is, again, disingenuous. How good are our greenhouse initiatives? I think they are pretty good, but do not believe me; believe ICLEI, an international group that looks at climate change. ICLEI has a five-star system, Mr Speaker, and awards jurisdictions or cities one, two, three, four, or five stars against their criteria according to how well those cities or jurisdictions are addressing greenhouse gas issues.

Who has the most stars in Australia? The ACT has. Why do we have them? Because this government has taken greenhouse issues more seriously than any other jurisdiction in the country, has done more to address greenhouse issues than any other jurisdiction in this country, and will continue to do so.

For the edification of Mr Corbell, because he obviously cannot find it in the budget papers, I will actually read you the entire greenhouse strategy. There is an extra $180 million for new initiatives, and there are three specific initiatives in this year's budget to address greenhouse issues.

First, there is the commercial sector energy efficiency improvement program. It will take $15,000 and it is a pilot. They all start small because they are pilots. We want to make sure they work before we put large amounts of money into them. "Assistance will be

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