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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 11 Hansard (24 September) . . Page.. 3169 ..

MR WOOD (continuing):

through, and see how it goes," because, to achieve a successful outcome eventually-if it becomes permanent-we do need to have the community on side with us.

That trial began in March 2001, which is 18 months ago, so we are substantially through the two-year period. I am aware of a report by the National Road Transport Commission that found adopting a default urban speed limit of 50 kilometres an hour would reduce the number of crashes. I am much aware of that. That has been raised before. Following conversations with transport ministers-and I had some when I was at a ministers conference a little while ago-it is quite clear to me that there is widespread support for such a system across Australia, in residential areas, certainly. I am also aware of what has been said in this Assembly.

I am aware that the issue was discussed at a road safety forum that Ms Gallagher opened just a week or so ago. I am aware of the Pedal Power view, and the conservation council's view. There are a lot of views about it. In view of all that, and what I think is coming across as fairly strong ACT community support, I will shortly take a proposal to the government on the future of the trial, and the possible early adoption of a 50-kilometre an hour default.

Any changes that would be proposed would also review the current system, which uses the Territory Plan as the basis for defining the 50-kilometre an hour streets. Mr Hargreaves, we would look at commercial areas, whether industrial or retail. However, changes there have to be made on a functional basis that will best meet the objectives of improving the safety of all road users, and maintaining the efficiency of the road system. In short, Mr Hargreaves, stand by for other announcements.

Mr Stanhope: I ask that all further questions be placed on the notice paper.

Gungahlin Drive extension

MRS DUNNE: Mr Speaker, I seek leave to make a statement.

MR SPEAKER: Pursuant to standing order 46?

MRS DUNNE: No, Mr Speaker. It is not a personal explanation. I seek leave to make a statement in relation to Gungahlin Drive.

Leave not granted.

Mr Humphries: Mr Speaker, can I take a point of order. It was often the case in the life of the previous Assembly that members would seek such permission. They were always granted leave. I ask that Mrs Dunne be given leave on this occasion, as was the case before.

MR SPEAKER: First of all, Mr Humphries, that is not a point of order. Mrs Dunne is entitled to seek my indulgence to make a statement pursuant to standing order 46. She did not do that. She chose to seek the indulgence of the Assembly. It has been denied.

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