Page 6009 - Week 14 - Wednesday, 8 December 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Having a vibrant airport in Canberra and having competitive advantages in Canberra, I think, is a plus.
It is also important to recognise that the way Canberra is structured and the location of our airport provide a lot of opportunities as well as some challenges. That is why we have called for a couple of things, and these are included in my amendment. We have publicly called for them in the past few weeks. This is about a couple of things. First, it is about acknowledging that the noise abatement zones at the moment do not protect all Canberrans. Unfortunately, parts of Canberra are not covered by the noise abatement zone. If you look at flight path records and the data that shows where the flights go, you will find that it is potentially and increasingly becoming a problem for the growing areas of Gungahlin and a small part of the inner north which are not covered by the noise abatement zone.
Effectively, aircraft are currently able to cut across. Instead of staying on the runway centre line when they are heading north for that extra half a kilometre or so, they are turning early. They are allowed to do this under the current noise abatement zones. What that means is that parts of Gungahlin now have no protection. They have no protection through noise abatement zones. We believe that that is not good enough. In addition, Watson is not totally covered by the noise abatement zone.
We believe that all parts of Canberra should be covered by the noise abatement zone. I think that this is critically important. I have written to the federal minister in those terms and my amendment goes to these issues. It is surprising that we have not heard more from the Labor Party and the Greens on this in terms of going in to bat for the people of Gungahlin and the inner north who, at the moment, are not afforded the same protection from flights over their properties as other parts of Canberra. It is really important that we get a unified approach in the Assembly so that the commonwealth hears that and we actually get some movement on it.
Secondly, and I think this is a really important point—this is where I partially agree with some of what Mr Rattenbury had to say—the fact of our geography means that we actually need something more. The second part of my amendment goes to this. Noise abatement zones at the moment are not enshrined in legislation. They are subject to change without going through a parliamentary process. Theoretically, these could be changed now without the tick-off of the federal parliament. That is of concern to me. I know that it is of concern to Tuggeranong residents and other residents in Canberra. Because we are an island in New South Wales, down the track decisions outside our control could potentially lead to a situation where noise abatement zones are amended. At the moment they do not go far enough, so that needs to be addressed.
Also, we need some greater protection going forward. It is critically important that the commonwealth enshrines that in legislation. It is important that we make a strong statement that we want to see it enshrined in legislation so that we do not just cover those parts of Canberra that are not covered at the moment—parts of Gungahlin and the inner north. We must also say that, because of the situation we are in in the ACT where those decisions can be taken, the commonwealth needs to afford us some protection.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video