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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2001 Week 10 Hansard (28 August) . . Page.. 3392 ..

MR HIRD: Thank you, Mr Deputy Speaker. It appears that I have touched a raw nerve in the case of some people. Let me deal with the facts. The facts are that, at recommendation 17, we talk about IPT routes. We talk about the joining of Horse Park Drive to Majura Road. Indeed, Mr Rugendyke and Mr Corbell know that draft variation 84 sought to move Majura Road 500 metres back towards the city. As well, the federal government complied with a request for an overpass to be constructed. Horse Park Drive, which will come up in 2004, is in the budget this year. So this government is sitting on its hands, is it? Let me tell you that this government is conscious of the needs of Gungahlin, which is one of the fastest growing residential area of Australia, with approximately 4,000 people per annum moving to the area.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I believe that in excess of 30,000 people are already fighting to get out of and into Gungahlin. If anything, the Labor Party in the early 1990s let the team down. They have let down the residents of Gungahlin. The road infrastructure was in place for all the other developing areas of Tuggeranong, Belconnen and Woden. If the road infrastructure had been in place in Gungahlin, we would not be arguing about or debating this matter today. The AIS was developed after the planners of this great city had identified the road system. It is not that we cannot change things, because the developing area of Bruce, Kaleen, Gungahlin and Aranda need adequate road systems.

I do not care what anyone says, Mr Deputy Speaker; the best form of rapid transit in this territory today, tomorrow and in the years ahead is the private motor car. If we want to bury our heads in the sand and say it is not, we are only fooling ourselves. We could look into the future and argue about the transport corridors.

I am sure the Minister for Urban Services is going to say that the rapid transit route that went through O'Connor Ridge and has been removed in this variation is a compromise. Although the government put forward an argument, other detailed submissions were made to my committee. As indicated by my learned colleague the Attorney-General, Mr Stefaniak, the government compromised when it took out the spur which went through O'Connor Ridge. That proposal for a spur road has been eliminated.

We have to take into account that this area has been affected by the development of and improvements to Bruce Stadium, and improvements of the AIS. If the Save the Ridge people are arguing-it is their democratic right to argue, and I will defend that right-that the eastern route, which has been moved an extra 300 metres as a result of a compromise, will be responsible for an unacceptable level of gas emissions, then they should have been arguing that the spur road is the most favoured route because it is the most direct route.

The western option would remove a minimum of 2,000 car spaces which are in walking distance of Bruce Stadium. So what can we do? If we go the western route, those 2,000 car spaces will have to be moved behind the Bruce complex, where the existing car park is. I submit that that would cause even more damage to the area they are concerned about.

The Bruce site has 600,000 visitors a year. If the western route goes in we stand to lose 100,000 tourists a year. The western option would undermine living conditions for 250 elite athletes, and we know of the success that this great country had last year in the Olympics. The adoption of the western route would do little to guarantee a continuation

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