Page 3389 - Week 11 - Tuesday, 21 October 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Further to this line of thought, the government says that many people will use the tram for park and ride. However, how is this going to help active transport? Of course, it encourages car ownership and actually encourages car dependency.
The commitment to spend $800 million was not in the best interests of Canberrans. Ms Gallagher’s regular hesitance to fully back the project in media interviews is evidence of that. The real reason is that, to date, light rail has kept Labor in power with Mr Rattenbury’s support for a couple of years, and will do so for another couple of years.
It is easy for Ms Berry and others to spin the same old intangible motherhood statements about how good and transformational light rail can be. But the reality is that the evidence does not point to that experience in Canberra. Research undertaken by the government, government-commissioned researchers and others shows that this project is going to be economically marginal, financially disastrous and neutral or perhaps even negative from a public transport point of view. Yet the government gloss over this and say all is well and that it is worth while spending $800 million. Of course, there was no assessment done whatsoever of what was the best route or the best mode. Again, their ideology and their willingness to sign an agreement with Mr Rattenbury were paramount.
I understand why rail and public transport enthusiasts would be excited about light rail. I understand that most people, given a choice, like the concept of a tram. But it still has to be paid for. Most people would probably prefer to get a helicopter to work, but the reality is that it is just not possible, and the reality is that, for the vast majority of Canberrans, light rail is not going to affect them very much at all. The fact is that everything has to be paid for, and there is an opportunity cost for everything that we do.
I have spoken at length in this place about concerns with the patronage, route selection, cost and other elements of the proposal. And to the Assembly’s delight, you will be hearing much more from me and my colleagues over the coming years about this issue. We do not back away from our commitment to get the best possible outcome for Canberra taxpayers. What could $800 million purchase for capital upgrades for active transport infrastructure across Canberra? Perhaps one light rail route already serviced by the best bus in the network, or perhaps it could be a multitude of other options. We should do justice to the other options and at least consider them prior to rushing in and spending even more money on capital metro.
I thank Ms Berry for this opportunity to talk about transport policy.
MR RATTENBURY (Molonglo) (4.08): I thank Ms Berry for raising this MPI, which recognises the importance of active transport in our city. Active transport is, of course, part of the broader concept of active living.
Active living and active transport are concepts that have the strong support of the Greens. The Greens have a proud legacy of advancing policies on investment in and recognition of active transport and active living, not just in the ACT but right across Australia.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video