Page 211 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 13 February 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
In November 2007 the government’s second budget appropriation bill earmarked an additional $17 million for climate change initiatives, including a further $10 million to implement specific elements of its climate change action plan. Actions to receive funding in the second appropriation were: action 8, $2 million a year over four years to improve the energy efficiency of public housing—the first instalment of the government’s $20 million 10-year commitment; action 14, free bus travel for bicycle riders using ACTION on-bus bike racks—$164,000 over four years and an additional 50 bike racks at a cost of $70,000; action 15, doubling the new home owner’s entitlement to trees and shrubs to $220 at a cost of $438,000; action 25, making a start on the 25-year wholesale renewal of our urban forest; action 27, establishment of a grants program to help community and not-for-profit groups assess and improve the energy performance of buildings they occupy at a cost of $1 million over two years; and action 43, a carbon sequestration audit costing $50,000.
The government will review current and potential natural sequestration levels and opportunities. This additional funding takes the government’s initial investment in the implementation of climate change initiatives to $63 million over the next four years. The government is also undertaking several projects to improve the design and planning of our city to be more sustainable. This includes the new Eastlake development and investing in public transport improvements. (Time expired.)
Amendment negatived.
MRS DUNNE (Ginninderra) (5.50): Mr Speaker I seek leave to move the amendment circulated in my name.
Leave granted.
MRS DUNNE: I move:
Omit paragraphs (2) and (3), substitute:
“(2) the ACT was the first Australian jurisdiction to recognise the importance of climate change and that it adopted Kyoto targets in its 1997 greenhouse strategy; and
(3) that the Stanhope Government abandoned the 1997 greenhouse strategy in 2005, leaving the ACT without policy in this area for two years.”.
Mr Speaker, the motion put forward by Mr Gentleman some time ago back in November 2006 is an interesting one for what it does not say. It is light on words and it is light on action. It is so light on words that I see Mr Gentleman playing catch up and trying to actually fix up the paucity of content in his motion. While some of that which is proposed to be amended by Mr Gentleman is unexceptionable, I think that we need to put in context why we are where we are and why we have the weathering the change action plan that came out last year.
Up until the emergence of the Stanhope government, the ACT had a very strong reputation and strong commitment to addressing greenhouse issues, even at a time when there was not the amount of evidence and the amount of research that would
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .