Page 3108 - Week 08 - Thursday, 25 June 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Turning to the issue of our investment, there is significant investment in a range of new programs. I have talked about plastic bags so I will not go into that again. In the waste area, the development of a future waste strategy and a commercial waste scheme is an important new piece of policy work that will look at how we can tackle waste that is generated in the commercial and industrial sectors. In particular, over half of all waste to landfill currently comes from the commercial and industrial sectors. There is, in particular, significant food waste which creates opportunities for combustible recycling collection and processing, as well as the e-waste issue, which a number of other members have mentioned.
We will focus very strongly on the development of a future waste strategy in the coming months. I look forward to engaging with members and the community on that, because we do need to maintain the objective of zero waste. That must be the objective for any urban community. That will be reiterated and placed in a context as we move forward with the development of that new strategy.
The government will also be implementing one of its key election commitments to purchase increased green energy for its own operations. We will move to 30 per cent of all our operations powered by renewable energy at a cost of just over half a million dollars, or $600,000, rising to $900,000 in the outyears. This significant investment fulfils our election commitment and will result in 8,834 fewer tonnes of CO2 being emitted as a result of that investment. That very important commitment is an example of a territory leading by example.
I have talked a little bit about switch your thinking so I will not reiterate those points. I will turn, however, to the issues around water. I refute absolutely the claims by the Liberal Party that the government has in any way delayed its consideration in relation to water security projects. The bottom line is the government got formal advice from Actew in 2007 recommending the development and expansion of the Cotter Dam. We agreed to that advice in the same year. So any suggestion that we delayed or obfuscated on that issue is simply wrong. The investments that the government is making in improving water security are very important for our future.
I note, Mr Speaker, your comment: “Well, imagine, wouldn’t it be great if we spent all that money on water efficiency in households?” Yes, it would, but are you seriously suggesting that we do not need to also augment supply? I do not think Canberrans would buy that argument. I do not think it can be backed up by the facts. You reach a certain point where water efficiency measures alone, demand measures alone, are not going to address the climate volatility that we face. We also need that supply augmentation.
My attitude is that both are needed. There needs to be a balanced approach. The government is doing that through the water security projects and projects such as the stormwater wetlands project, which is going to capture about three gigalitres of water for reuse. That is very significant in watering sportsgrounds, ovals, school grounds and the Canberra racecourse, for example, EPIC. All of those organisations are going to be able to access that water potentially. That is a good example of alternative supply, a more sustainable form of supply, than some of the investment that is occurring in other areas.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .