Page 3260 - Week 09 - Tuesday, 19 August 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
review the environmental sustainability of taxes on motor vehicles. The government supported this in principle in June 2004, saying it would be considered in the implementation of the sustainable transport plan. The wheels turn slowly indeed—not the car wheels, of course. Although climate change is, as the Chief Minister has remarked, the greatest challenge of our generation, the sustainable transport plan does not seem to be being implemented in a great hurry. I am glad that the new integrated transport plan will be refreshing the sustainable transport plan, but I hope there will continue to be community discussion to help the government understand just how integrated transport planning could be. We need a sustainable integrated transport plan.
The recent state of the environment report recommends establishing an independent, multidisciplinary, sustainable transport task force to do such work, which I wholeheartedly support. It is certainly time that the government of a car-based city—Canberra—took greater account of the effect that cars have on our environment. Although this scheme will help reduce transport emissions, which account for almost one-quarter of the ACT’s overall greenhouse gas emissions, it will not reduce them by much.
How many car-purchasing decisions will be based on the adjustment of this tax? Not as many as we would like, I guess. If we really want to reduce our emissions and climate change impact, we need to offer more than reduced stamp duty schemes. We also need a similar scheme for annual car registration, and we need motor bikes and electric scooters to be included in such schemes. Why, indeed, have they been excluded from this scheme that we are debating today? Are they not more efficient than cars? Do they not mean less demand on roads and less demand on parking spaces? Do they not provide the benefits of independent travel combined with low fuel usage? Constituents have written to me in frustration about the difficulties that they are having registering and finding safe routes to ride their scooters and motorised bicycles. Both the NSW and ACT governments are making it very difficult for people who seriously want to consider this efficient form of transport. That is not an approach that should be taken by a government that wants to reduce emissions and integrate transport.
One aspect of this scheme is that it will most likely be revenue neutral for the government. From a conversation with the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries, I understand this to be the case. However, depending on how many efficient cars are purchased, the scheme could even increase stamp duty revenue. If there is a net gain, I suggest that those funds be put towards improving public transport and not just lost in general revenue.
We need to consider what experts are proposing. Professor David Karoly of the United Nations climate change panel was recently appointed as the chair of the new Victorian expert panel on climate change. He proposes a major rethink of our transport funding to weight public transport over new roads at five to one. That is very different from what was in the integrated transport plan. He also proposes something you have all heard me say before—that is, all government policies should be assessed in terms of climate change.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .