Page 2291 - Week 08 - Tuesday, 12 August 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
position that would be supported by the broader population because improving public transport on Northbourne Avenue should be about improving transport outcomes for all transport users on this corridor, not just public transit users.
Their second choice, if they do not support reducing the number of general traffic lanes on Northbourne Avenue from three to two, is, of course, to build dedicated bus rapid transit lanes somewhere else. Presumably that means building those dedicated bus rapid transit lanes along the median strip along Northbourne Avenue. So what does that mean, Madam Deputy Speaker? What that means, of course, is that you turn the median strip on Northbourne Avenue into a road. That is what it means—a road which is separated from pedestrians because of the speed at which the bus rapid transit would operate.
Is that the outcome they want for Northbourne Avenue? Is that an outcome that the planning approval authority—the National Capital Authority—would support in any event? Do you think the National Capital Authority would support changing the median strip along Northbourne Avenue into a road? Do you think they would support that, Madam Deputy Speaker? We do not believe they would. It is completely inconsistent with their objectives for the corridor, which is to maintain the landscape character of the corridor.
What we have been able to demonstrate, through the landscape and design options that have been put forward in the very detailed public consultation process, over the last six weeks in particular, is that light rail is the best choice when it comes to integrating rapid public transit along this key landscape corridor—this corridor of national significance, this corridor that has planning obligations on it set out in the national capital plan. These are matters that must be addressed by those who advocate for bus rapid transit.
Of course, now, as before, they are silent on these issues. And they are silent on these issues because they have no plan for public transport in Canberra. They have no plan to improve transport outcomes along this corridor. They have no vision whatsoever. Their only position is to oppose any improvement that delivers better public transport for our city.
They opposed bus rapid transit when it was proposed in the earlier terms of this government. They opposed the development of dedicated busways when they were proposed and then implemented by this government in various locations across the city. They have even opposed giving priority to public transit along existing dedicated transitways, such as the T2 lane along Commonwealth Avenue. They have opposed, at every step, any measure to give priority to public transport in this city. And we do not expect anything less from them as a result.
The benefits of this project, of course, extend beyond the economic benefits that are outlined in the economic business case that will be underpinning this project. We saw four of Australia’s leading experts on transport, planning, sustainability and public health come out in recent weeks and support this project for Canberra.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video