Page 3520 - Week 11 - Thursday, 19 September 2013
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
I think this is reflected by the feedback from the community. TAMS undertakes regular community surveys across a whole range of matters. In particular, I can inform members of the Assembly that from the community survey for 2012-13, when it comes to neighbourhood parks, there was a satisfaction rating of 93 per cent. With the maintenance and pruning of trees in the urban parks, there was a satisfaction rating from the community of 93 per cent. With the general look and feel of local shopping centres, there was satisfaction of 91 per cent. And when it comes to town and district parks being clean and well maintained, there was a 96 per cent satisfaction rating from the community.
We can see from those figures that, whilst not absolutely everybody is happy, most people recognise that Canberra is a great city to live in, and it is well looked after. Personally, I would rather put myself in the camp of the 90-odd per cent in all of those categories who recognise that this is a tremendous city to live in. Anybody who has travelled anywhere will know that Canberra is a city that, frankly, is of a very high standard. There are places that need work; there are always bits and pieces that need to be done around the town. But to hear some of the descriptions we have heard in the chamber today about how depressing the suburbs are, which is the suggestion—that people will be depressed by living in the suburbs—is a long way from the reality of the Canberra that we live in.
For the benefit of members, I will provide a few statistics on some of the things that go on in Canberra to ensure that the city is maintained to as high as possible a standard for the resources that are available. There is always a discussion to be had, and I would be interested to have that discussion, about how we resource that. We have heard a lot today about what should be done in the city. How do we resource that? There is not too much fat in TAMS, I can assure you. Years and years of efficiency dividends mean it is an agency that runs pretty lean.
TAMS is always looking for improvements, and that is why the agency has taken on board, through this year’s budget, a review of parks and city services. But within that, we need to have a serious debate about how much resource we are willing to put in and what level of services we expect. All the things that Mrs Jones described can be done, but it takes more resources.
Let us have that discussion. Do we want to raise the amount of revenue the government is taking in so we can employ more people? Do we want people just driving around, looking for random graffiti? Or are we happy with the current system where we rely on people to ring up and say, “I need this cleaned,” and TAMS comes out within 24 hours if it is offensive or three days if it is not offensive, if it is on public land or public assets? That is not a bad turnaround—24 hours for offensive graffiti, three days for non-offensive graffiti. I am open to having a discussion about employing a bunch of people who drive around this whole huge city looking for graffiti, but let us think about how we are going to resource that.
Mrs Jones interjecting—
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video