Page 2413 - Week 08 - Thursday, 30 August 2007

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


Again, it is a case of hairsplitting and quibbling over definitions to avoid providing substantial answers to what in this case was a reasonable line of questioning. There was ample scope in the question for the minister to explain his understanding of what is considered by the territory government to be clean or cleaner energy options and explain the funding breakdown for the different energy types, as this was the clear intent of the question.

In relation to ACTION buses, the minister was asked in estimates committee hearings on 26 June a simple question about a relocation of the ACTION call centre staff. Again, we saw a rather bizarre step of refusing to answer the question at the hearing and, instead, taking it on notice, despite having an army of departmental officials readily on hand to assist in answering the question. There was no consultation with departmental officials and there was not even a denial that the information might have already been available. Even in those answers where information was forthcoming, a range of serious issues have been raised about government performance.

The minister was very confident in estimates committee of the security arrangements at bus interchanges. He explained that security cameras are installed inside ACTION buses to attempt to deter offenders and provide evidence of offences when these occur. What the minister did not mention, and we have had some discussion in this last week, is that Woden bus interchange—where Mr Pratt has been vigorous in his pursuit and where I also took up the matter publicly on behalf of constituents—which has been the scene of some violent incidents this year, had been passed over for the immediate installation of security cameras.

The supreme confidence of the minister stood in contrast to the remarks of the Attorney-General on this issue, who conceded in estimates committee hearings on 19 June that the CCT coverage at the interchange itself, not in the buses but in the interchange, was not optimal. The Attorney-General has stated that the government is still considering how to improve this situation and we sincerely hope that it will receive the attention that it deserves. I am confident my colleague will not relent in his campaign until that area is a safe locality.

Mr Pratt and I have inspected the area. We have talked to people in the vicinity. We both continue to receive expressions of concern from parents and younger people and it is a condemnation of this government that this issue has been left to remain at this state of unsatisfactory security for such a large period. I believe shortly after I was elected, I expressed concern about the Woden interchange, and it is staggering that some three years later we are still talking about fixing up a problem that everybody who lives in the Woden vicinity knows is a significant issue, including some of the retailers in that area.

Much is said also, Mr Speaker, about the taxi industry. We seem to have no ability in this territory to solve the problems that exist. The government does not seem to be willing to consult at a level that is appropriate or reasonable with the taxi industry.

Mr Hargreaves: That is rubbish.

MR MULCAHY: I know the minister refutes that allegation but it is certainly the perception that is there, and the consequence is that the people of Canberra are


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