Page 2230 - Week 06 - Wednesday, 22 June 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
were referred to in this. But this is six years ago. Why have they not done anything about it? I am less than convinced that we are in a position to do everything. I certainly want to see that one of the things that we do is give serious priority for public transport.
I would also note that, as part of this study, the consultants looked at some of the alternatives like Monash drive and the Gungahlin Drive extension. They did not, anywhere in the document, mention Majura parkway as an alternative for reducing the problem of inner north transport. It simply is not going to solve the problem.
Ms Bresnan’s proposed motion has a list of items to go through to actually address the issues, and I will be commending her motion to the Assembly. (Time expired.)
MR HANSON (Molonglo) (11.27): First I would like to reflect on what the Labor members and the Greens have said in this place. It is quite clear—and I think Simon Corbell made this point—that the Greens are trying to have a bob each way. They want to cloud the fact that they do not support this road in some mumbo jumbo about public transport, and you can read their motion and listen to the two speeches that have gone before to see that. But the point is that this is a question of: do you support the road—yes or no? That does not mean that you do not support public transport; it does not mean that you do not support other sustainability measures that the government may be introducing. The question is: do you or do you not support the Majura parkway?
Simon Corbell made that point quite eloquently. In doing so, he supported Alistair Coe’s motion, which is the most simple of the three and which goes directly to the point. I will read the motion:
That this Assembly supports the construction of the Majura Parkway.
So, if we want to have a very clear opinion from each of the parties in this place on whether they support the parkway or not—without the distractions, without the gloss—then let us vote for Alistair Coe’s motion when it comes to that today.
It is quite clear that the Greens are trying to cloud their dislike of roads and their dislike of cars and their dislike of the Majura parkway with a delay motion—“Let’s delay and have a bit more of a look at this”—when it is quite clear that this has been an infrastructure priority for Canberra since 1970. I am not sure what it is that the Greens want to have more of a look at. The case, I think, has been very well made over a number of years.
So when we come to the vote on this—this is the point I want to make at the outset—let us make sure that we support Mr Coe’s motion. The Labor motion, although there is much in it that makes sense—and I think Dr Bourke made some very good points in his speech—contains some distractions; there is politics in it. There is reference to continuing commitment and determination and so on that is unnecessary. We do not need to turn this into who is better at this or who is worse at this—“I am more in support of the road than you are,” and so on. If we want a clear definition of do we support the road—yes, or no—then let us vote on it. Let us make sure that we support Mr Coe’s motion.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video