Page 1207 - Week 04 - Tuesday, 23 March 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Again, it really surprises me that this sort of thing is not included. It really is disappointing that we have to make this recommendation. Surely, in an annual report, where you are obliged to give information about the large procurements of the organisation, it would make sense to also include the procurement type so that we do not then have to put in further questions on notice and create more work when it would have been much easier to include it the first time round.
Recommendation 4 is:
The Committee recommends that planning for the provision of ACTION services for the Molonglo region and other new residential areas be anticipated from the beginning of settlement in those areas.
I think this is absolutely vital. It is not just ACTION services; it is all infrastructure. I think we do have to make sure that we are putting in infrastructure ahead of demand. As we have seen so many times with this government, especially with developments in Gungahlin, we have substandard infrastructure and only when it is at capacity are we seeing the government reluctantly take action, with the Gungahlin Drive extension being a classic example. It would be a tragedy if Molonglo was yet another example where the infrastructure did not keep pace with the growth. Ideally, the infrastructure would be there well ahead of the growth.
From a government revenue point of view, I would think this is actually very beneficial. I would think that, if you actually do have infrastructure there ahead of people buying land, that would help with the land price. Unfortunately, this government’s short-term vision when it comes to infrastructure and capital upgrades means that we do not get that vision that we might hope to get.
On this, I think it is also important to remember other established suburbs or suburbs that already have inhabitants that are still lacking bus services. Casey is a great example. There are hundreds and hundreds of people that live in Casey at the moment. There is no ACTION service that runs there, and ACTION has no plans to run there either. How can you possibly claim to have a sustainable transport plan when the buses do not even go to all the suburbs? It is absolutely absurd to think that this government are actually serious about increasing patronage for ACTION buses, yet they do not even run an ACTION bus to all the suburbs in Canberra. It is absolutely absurd.
I would like to see what work can be done to either incorporate the 51 and 52 services so that they go to Casey or introduce another service that would serve the residents of Casey. More and more people are moving into that suburb every day and, with that in mind, I think it is high time that the ACT government actually invested in that community with a bus service.
Recommendation 7, as I think both my colleagues spoke about, is:
The Committee recommends that the Department of Territory and Municipal Services provide information in the 2009/2010 Annual Report on the progress of, and the process used to address, the backlog of heritage nominations.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video