Page 664 - Week 03 - Thursday, 15 March 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
What you have got to do is make it an economic decision between the cost of operating a vehicle and using public transport, but you have to have a public transport system that is convenient, extremely reliable, punctual, accessible and meets the needs of the travelling public. It is no good having a bus system that works wonderfully well for the operators, for the shifts that are contained in award agreements and the like, that appeals to Mr Gentleman’s colleagues over there and those in the trade union movement but does not take into account the needs of parents and their children in getting to school, and our retired citizens, who will be growing in number.
It is significant in Seniors Week that we are talking about this issue that Mrs Dunne has put on the table. It is important to recognise in Seniors Week that a looming problem will be the ageing population, access to transport, and mobility and the challenges that older people are going to face in terms of driving themselves. We have to recognise that this will be a growing problem in the territory.
We have to ensure that the transportation system in Canberra is developed and advancing, with a view to accommodating and meeting those needs, and to recognise that there will be a substantial percentage of the community that is going to come to rely on public transport. We have to make the provision of that transport safe and reliable. We do not want a situation where people are frightened to go to interchanges—and I hope to talk about that later today—but it is staggering that people have apprehensions, and we need to ensure that the service is responsive to community needs.
DR FOSKEY (Molonglo) (5.12): My preference is still for an inquiry, using the terms of reference that Mrs Dunne proposed, because I note that what is to be removed by the government’s amendment is the examining of issues related to governance, administrative function, budget and timetabling. Those are quite key factors and they certainly go to the essence of the problem.
One of the reasons why I believe quite unsound decisions have been made is the abolition of the ACTION board. If we are going to talk about how the government takes advice, we have to have some section there on governance; otherwise we see the government making its decisions without reference to the community.
We had a new timetable put into place—again, I believe, without consultation, certainly from the ACTION board, which had been abolished—and then we were told that people could complain, they could issue complaints, and the government would respond to the complaints. That is a very backward way of doing things. To me, it is a band-aid approach, rather than looking at the needs, where the needs are and then designing within our resources a bus system that suits those needs.
Realistically speaking, I am quite sure that the government’s amendment will get up and it is nice that the opposition supports the amendment. But I lay on the table—
Members interjecting—
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Order! Could the two scrums on my left and right please quieten down. Dr Foskey has the floor.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .