Page 2873 - Week 08 - Wednesday, 24 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
of the year, a concession holder. It is administratively difficult; it is inefficient; and, of course, it just highlights the inequity in relation to treating as school students a group that no other government or community in Australia treats as schoolchildren or school students when the capacity exists for them, as other governments and other public transport systems have discovered, to be treated quite appropriately as a concession holder.
I will repeat the one point that Mr Corbell made which is pertinent to this. It is 49 per cent, yes, but it is only 40c actually. Forty-nine per cent sounds fantastic, doesn’t it, when you are in opposition. But we are talking about a 40c increase per trip for that particular group. So let us not over-jag it, with great big posters all around the place about an outrageous 49 per cent jag of university students. It is a 40c increase.
The government will support the amendment that Ms Bresnan moved. We are happy to refer this issue to the review of concessions, which we are currently undertaking. (Time expired.)
MS HUNTER (Ginninderra—Parliamentary Convenor, ACT Greens) (3.41): I think Ms Bresnan put forward some good reasons why she felt that Mr Coe’s motion did not quite hit the mark and why she had put forward an amendment. To pick up on Mr Stanhope’s statements just then and some particular issues he raised, some were about the fact that tertiary students in other jurisdictions do pay a concession rate; they do not have a student rate. He felt that that was getting us consistent with other jurisdictions across the country.
There may well be many tertiary students out there who do not know that that is the case. That might be part of the issue. A little bit more information goes a long way and it really goes to the heart of what Ms Bresnan was saying. If you can have it reviewed, then we can be looking at the social impact and be doing this on a stronger basis as to why we would increase fares at all. Her amendment does not stop us looking at pensioners, war widows and other people out there in the community. In fact, it says:
… review the impact of ACTION fare increases on students and low income earners, and other customers who cannot afford to buy pre-paid multiple tickets …
So it is already set up to show that pensioners, war widows, those who are on some entitlement or benefit, can also be captured by looking at this review of how we go about increasing things. For many people who do not have their own transport, having access to public transport is incredibly important as far as being able to live a rich and fulfilling life is concerned. It is about being able to get to your appointments, being able to get to school, being able to get to employment and being able to have those social connections and that connectivity to your community and right across the ACT. These things are incredibly important, we know.
We do understand that there is quite a large community service obligation given to public transport, and so there should be. It is actually one of those incredibly vital pieces of infrastructure that a society which sees itself as kind and caring and wanting
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .