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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 07 Hansard (Thursday, 1 July 2004) . . Page.. 3114 ..

2004 budget for capital works to expand our water recycling infrastructure. The government has put forward a plan but does not appear to be committed to it.

I am disappointed that Canberra’s 30 per cent of households who rent seem to have been completely ignored by this strategy. The government has taken the position that it will not fully subsidise the installation of water efficiency measures, yet there is no financial incentive for landlords to make their rental properties more water efficient and there is no penalty if they do not. So very little would change for a substantial number of households in the ACT.

The response the government put forward this week to the motion—supported by this Assembly—that I moved last year calling for better energy water efficiency measures for rental properties, was woeful and clearly inadequate. When faced with undercapacity at their treatment plant, the Queanbeyan council fully funded water saving measures such as dual flush toilets. The ACT government will not match these efforts, so it is unlikely that renters will benefit from new household incentive schemes that are put forward in the strategy.

As a landlord itself, the government has failed to follow rhetoric with action. The conservation council, ACTCOSS and ACT Shelter have all called for government spending to make public housing more water efficient. The ACT government is the landlord for one in 10 households in the territory, yet there was no initiative in the budget to improve water efficiency in public or community managed dwellings.

The other area the government has not done enough on relates to the treatment and utilisation of our stormwater. Polluted stormwater makes our lakes unsafe for swimming for some parts of the year and, if the water that was flowing into our lakes was actually captured, treated, and utilised for irrigation, we could reduce demand on dams and make our lakes a recreational focus for Canberrans and visitors. Not only would visitors see themselves in Canberra; they would see themselves swimming in our lakes. The government has argued that our lakes were designed to serve as open sewers, but this does not mean that we cannot move away from that thinking and actually clean them up. The “Think water, act water” document gives the government the leeway to fully address all of these outstanding areas if they could only find the political will.

On the subject of a new dam, the ACT Democrats are of the view that a new dam is unsustainable, both environmentally and economically. We have to finally learn to live within our means and start thinking about improving the quality of our natural environment, instead of consuming more resources as our population grows. Most people who support the construction of a dam, it appears, either do not care about downstream impact or believe that water running into the ocean is wasted and that our use of this water represents the highest value use of water that previously fed rivers in New South Wales, Victoria and South Australia.

The thing that I support most strongly in the strategy put forward by the government is its choosing not to commit to the construction of a new reservoir and instead viewing it as a last resort if the population actually comes in at the high end of predictions and if we cannot achieve sufficient water savings. I would be concerned if the government were rushing into detailed planning of a new dam when there is still so much we should be doing to reduce current levels of mains water consumption. If there is a risk of the

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