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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 10 Hansard (28 August) . . Page.. 3371 ..

MR CORBELL (continuing):

Labor believes that the western alignment is the most appropriate alignment for the Gungahlin Drive extension, not because it has no impact on the natural environment or on residential amenity, because it has, but because in our view it has the least possible impact. The western alignment, the community option, has been identified as far back as 1991 as the best possible route for the Gungahlin Drive extension. Indeed, the key recommendations of the Joint Standing Committee on the National Capital chaired by the former Member for Fraser, Mr John Langmore, highlighted this very point.

Mr Speaker, the community option is a route which impacts at the edge of Canberra Nature Park rather than along the entire length of the Bruce/O'Connor Ridge area. It is a route which has the least possible impact on the cultural, recreational, and environmental amenity of the O'Connor and Bruce Ridge area. This is, of course, in stark contrast to the government's flawed eastern alignment. The western alignment is a shorter and more direct route to the Belconnen Way/Caswell Drive intersection than is the government's alignment. It is not a route, like the government's, which goes to the east to get to the west. Unfortunately, that is exactly what the government is proposing today.

For all of these reasons, Mr Speaker, Labor believes that it must seek to preserve on the Territory Plan the western alignment until the October election and then see a variation to the Territory Plan proceeded with so that the construction of this important arterial road link can proceed according to the current capital works timetable.

Mr Speaker, this road is predicated on the presumption that the percentage of trips from Gungahlin by public transport will be 20 per cent of all journeys. At the moment public transport, as a total share of transport modes, used for journeys to and from Gungahlin stands at around three to four per cent. Even with a four-fold increase in the percentage of trips by public transport, this road will be required. It is a matter of transport equity for Gungahlin residents, and it is the reason why Labor supports the development of the Gungahlin Drive extension.

Labor does not agree with the argument that the road should not be built at all. This argument would seek to deny an important transport leg for Gungahlin residents, with no clear, viable alternative. Improved public transport, including the removal of the discriminatory zone or fare system, and a clear strategy to encourage employment location in the Gungahlin town centre are both firmly on Labor's election agenda. These are issues which should have been addressed by the government years ago. They have failed to do so. But when all these things are said, Mr Speaker, and even with all these things implemented-implemented by a prospective Labor government-there would still be a demand for this important road link.

Labor argues that the Gungahlin Drive extension is required, and it needs to be built on the timetable outlined in the current capital works program. The difference between Labor and the government relates to the most appropriate route. I would like to outline in detail some of these issues today.

Firstly, Mr Speaker, the government has argued that its route has less impact on the Canberra Nature Park area of Bruce and O'Connor Ridge. This argument is simply untrue. The government's alignment travels the entire length of the Bruce and O'Connor

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