Page 3855 - Week 10 - Thursday, 27 August 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
I know the village of Hall in my electorate is well serviced by the Deane’s Transit Group through Transborder. There are, of course, a few issues there, but, by and large, they do provide a very good service, especially for school students. Here we have a good transport provider in the region that employs many people. I understand it employs many ACTION bus drivers, in fact, on a casual and part-time basis. It would be a great shame if we do not actually incorporate private organisations, like the Deane’s Transit Group, as part of a solution here in the ACT. I urge the government to look into incorporating Deane’s into the solution here in the ACT and to take some of the issues I raised in the speech into consideration.
MS BRESNAN (Brindabella) (3.53): A sustainable transport plan for Canberra needs to work at every level, and it needs to take an integrated approach to transport. Let us start at a territory level. Has the ACT government yet asked the federal government to amend the national capital plan to incorporate a sustainable transport plan? If it has, what answer has the ACT government received; if it has not, when will it follow up on the joint house committee recommendation?
Just last week the Senate inquiry into public transport tabled its report, which makes a compelling case for substantial commonwealth funding for public transport. The committee recognised that public transport moderates traffic congestion, improves the general urban amenity when coupled with priority to walking and cycling, improves energy efficiency, reduces reliance on imported oil, reduces transport greenhouse emissions, promotes public health and is needed to reduce the transport disadvantage and social isolation of people without cars. We in the ACT need to join with the other states and territories to prosecute this case at a COAG level and to carry through with what is recommended in the Senate report.
There is also the issue of Canberra’s links to the rest of the world and the region. There are many who argue that air travel is unsustainable and that growing our investment in and dependence on air travel is, environmentally at the very least, unsustainable by definition. The issues are more complex than that. But like all Greens, I am concerned with the way the business plans of the Canberra airport seem to be driving the transport planning for Canberra. The Canberra airport master plan foresees the growth of the airport over the next 20 years—a more than doubling of the number of passengers, a new terminal, a significant expansion of office and retail space in the four airport precincts and, most controversially, the establishment of a 24-hour freight hub to be accompanied by a requirement for an expansion of warehouse and office infrastructure both on site and within easy reach.
In that context, the new proposed four-lane, $250 million Majura Parkway is a key feature of the freight handling plans. Ironically, a freight hub would also require fuel for the increased air travel to be brought into Canberra on the road, and this raises a very significant issue for the Canberra community. The recent announcement by Shell that they will no longer be bringing fuel into Canberra on the rail link means that there will be more fuel trucks on our roads, specifically on the highway between Canberra and Sydney.
In terms of rail, Canberra has a problem in light of the maintenance of this infrastructure. While some time in the future, if Canberra grows significantly, we may
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .