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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 01 Hansard (Wednesday, 11 February 2004) . . Page.. 254 ..

deal with the safety of other people in the community who may be regarded as being at risk on the roads—that is, older people—and also brings childcare centres into the question. There are well-established grounds for having specific traffic devices for groups of people who may have special needs when using roads. These groups include older people, children, parents with young children and people with a disability.

I understand that it is true that a school crossing was not in place on the first day of school this year at the new Amaroo school. However, I am assured by the minister’s office that signs had been erected to indicate a 40-kilometre zone on the streets around the school on the first day and that a school crossing was in place on the second day of school. I am glad that this occurred, and I am happy to support the first part of the motion. It is not of much concern for the government; we are just noting it.

The second part of Mr Pratt’s motion condemns all the school crossings in the ACT. It is difficult to say that about all school crossings; I would not feel comfortable saying it. I have certainly heard concerns over a few school crossings, but I believe these concerns could be addressed following a review of the traffic management around schools. My amendment removes this statement.

The third part of Mr Pratt’s motion seems reasonable. My amendment adds the involvement of the minister responsible for roads. This seems like an important thing, so that the department involved in managing roads can contribute constructively to the review. If a review is to be done, it should include traffic issues in the whole area and take into account the land use around the school and the nature of the roads surrounding the school, et cetera, and my amendment indicates as much. I have also added to the motion the question of childcare centres and the potential of having 40-kilometre zones there.

In my amendment I am asking the government to report back to the Assembly on traffic issues around childcare centres and the potential for 40-kilometre limits. The safety of the streets around childcare centres would be enhanced for young children and parents with children by the introduction of restricted speed limits. This is standard practice for preschools and primary schools, so it does not seem out of the ordinary to extend the policy to places where children are concentrated during the day. These speed limits can apply only during peak times for pick-up and drop-off around the centres, although I understand the minister will have some comments to make about that. The government has actually looked at it, and that is why I am interested. I am changing my amendment to ask it to report back to the Assembly.

The minister, as I understand it, is happy with the time that Mr Pratt has for the work he is asking for but felt that, if I asked for full reviews of childcare centres and aged persons facilities as well, it would make that timeframe impossible. As the government is telling me that it has already done work on both those issues, I am quite happy to just ask it to report back to the Assembly on them so that we get a sense of what it has found out. We can take further action after seeing that information if we want to.

The amendment will also include a request to report back on traffic issues and the potential for speed restrictions around aged persons facilities. Older people can find it difficult to cross the road and react to fast-moving traffic, and it is important that older

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