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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 05 Hansard (Friday, 14 May 2004) . . Page.. 1982 ..

targets—the targets they say they subscribe to. But saying is one thing: doing is another, and this government does not do.

Public transport—this is a corker, Mr Deputy Speaker—is a really classic case of spending more and getting less. Before the budget was presented, it was announced in the sustainable transport plan that there was going to be $1.1 million for new services in Gungahlin, south Tuggeranong and west Belconnen. It is very interesting that there seems to be—and the emphasis is on “seems”—$1.1 million extra in the ACTION budget. But there is no provision for extra plant and equipment—in fact, this is down 1.5 per cent—so there are no new buses to meet the extra hours of service. Hours of service are up only 0.5 of a per cent and journeys are up a measly 1 per cent. So it seems to me that they have actually provided for extra services in Gungahlin, south Tuggeranong and west Belconnen by redirecting buses and reducing patronage somewhere else.

I await estimates with great anticipation so that the minister and ACTION can explain to us what they are doing. At the moment it is another three-card trick. We are paying for more and we are getting less. This is the whole tenor of everything that you see in this government’s budget in relation to the environment.

MS TUCKER (4.30): I will keep the topic on and start my comments with the environment. I agree with Mrs Dunne: the government’s funding commitment for the implementation of the greenhouse strategy is shameful, although I point out that pushing a freeway through a nature park and further facilitating car use is not consistent with a real commitment to greenhouse gas reductions. So Mrs Dunne is in a very weak position, as is her party, on the question of greenhouse, particularly when it is clear that emissions are increasing in the transport sector.

We know that climate change is having a massive impact worldwide and on our own region. We are well aware that the federal government has let us down by failing to support alternative energy research such as the CRC for sustainable energy in Canberra. The existing Photonics CRC and the proposed new Solar CRC are important assets for the ACT and for Australia. I am really disappointed that I have not seen Jon Stanhope and Brendan Smyth speaking about this much more than they have been.

In Queensland, Premier Beattie and the Liberal MPs, along with the Liberal President, Tony Staley, are actively and publicly fighting the federal government’s decision to fund fossil fuel CRCs over environmentally beneficial CRCs. Instead of further developing renewable energy sources and looking towards the future, the federal government is pouring millions into a dead-end cause, yet the ACT government and the ACT opposition have stayed silent on this matter, as far as I know. If they have been releasing press releases and making statements, I apologise for misrepresenting them, but I would like to see them.

The 2003 ACT State of the Environment Report clearly stated that, if present trends continue, the ACT’s greenhouse emissions are expected to increase to well above the ACT government’s self-imposed target. Instead of creative, collaborative solutions to address energy efficiency, the budget contains initiatives that are too small to make any real impact on the status quo. It does seem to me that the government is not committed to meeting even its own greenhouse gas targets.

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