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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 4 Hansard (10 April) . . Page.. 900 ..

MR HUMPHRIES (continuing):

I do not believe that this project is dependent entirely upon certain arrangements for a second international airport for Sydney. I do not think it is dependent on other major infrastructure being developed around a high-speed train route, although either of those projects may assist it to occur in an economic sense.

But it is certainly dependent on an acknowledgment that relying on increasing air travel or air transport is a short-sighted approach-not merely because, as Mr Hargreaves has mentioned, there is a question mark over the safety of air transport after events of last year but also because it follows that the cost of such transport will still be high, beyond the reach of many Australians and certainly uneconomic from the point of view of some major goods transport and freighting issues which Australia needs to be very careful of, given the great distances between major Australian centres and between Australia and the rest of the world.

The affordability of transport of services and goods is a critical issue for this nation, and it is an issue which can be assisted by the provision of a good transport system, including high-speed rail.

It may be the case that in a few years or decades from now some technology will be available which will be more appropriate than anything available today and that there will be at that point a greater, better, more economic case for high-speed rail deliveries than today. But the point this motion makes is that there is a case today for some form of exploration of high-speed rail. We must be exploring now what that means for this country.

The feasibility study which was announced last year-when the train project was, in a formal sense, postponed or put off by the federal government-needs to stay on the table and needs to be pursued. Funding needs to be provided for it, and acceptance needs to be there on day one that government, particularly federal government, must provide significant support, including significant financial support for this to work. I am pleased this is a project which, if it happens, is going to embrace the private sector. It clearly must. It must also embrace funding from federal governments and indeed other Australian governments.

In supporting this motion, I think it is worth making a few points that are a little bit less bipartisan. It is true that the federal government plays a pivotal role in this project. It is also true that there are other parties that need to be supportive of this for it to happen, and there are other parties that have not been supportive and have contributed to the position today where, at best, the project is on a very slow burner at the very back of the stove.

Those other parties include the New South Wales government and the federal opposition. The New South Wales government was, at best, an extremely lukewarm supporter of the fast train. In my own discussions with Bob Carr, I, as Chief Minister, had a firm indication that the New South Wales government would potentially provide concessions to the project but would not put any direct dollars into the project. There would be no money coming from the New South Wales government for this project.

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