Page 1950 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 3 June 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Professor Newman points out that rebuilding and renewing the city around rail is now globally accepted as a major competitive advantage for city economies. He points out several good examples, especially Perth, and notes:
Cars and buses are now only supplementary to the knowledge economy centres that are so critical for all cities.
Professor Newman says:
This is why light rail is being chosen as the preferred new infrastructure investment in US cities. Between 1993 and 2013 the public transport system in US cities grew by 23 per cent and car use actually declined. Heavy rail grew 68 per cent, light rail 190 per cent and buses declined 3 per cent. Planners and politicians now build light rail to improve their urban walkability as the top six most walkable cities in the US have 38 per cent higher GDP per capita. Denver is building light rail to retain their young, educated workforce.
Professor Newman concludes by making a point that I strongly agree with. He says:
Canberra’s light rail is part of its strategic future to be a nationally significant knowledge economy city where the best of people-intensive urbanism can happen along one corridor, extending out at later dates, whilst maintaining its generally suburban character elsewhere. This is good economic policy and good urban policy.
I would be very interested to hear the Liberal Party’s view of these arguments. Perhaps they do not agree that light rail will help Canberra to grow a knowledge economy and put us in a favourable economic position for the future. I would be particularly interested to hear Mr Smyth’s views on that. Many times he has commented on the need to diversify this city’s economy; here we are seeking to do it and his party is trenchantly opposing it. But perhaps this vision of a knowledge economy is not one that they share. Perhaps they are not interested in this idea of a knowledge economy, of walkability, density or urban sustainability. It would be good to hear the alternative vision.
If that is not the vision, what is the alternative vision? Is it endless urban sprawl? Is it more roads? Is it putting people further and further out, where their transport costs will be even higher? Let us have a talk about the cost of living and what it means to situate somebody even further from the key employment nodes.
I strongly support investment in buses. They will be a key part of our transport future, linking into light rail corridors and ensuring that Canberrans get the advantages that come from each of the different modes of transport. However, I do not support cancelling the capital metro project and putting the money into buses instead.
By shunning light rail, the Liberal Party will throw away all of the advantages it brings to the city. These are the advantages I have mentioned many times already—things such as transport corridor development, renewable energy opportunities and high quality public transport vehicles that are separated from traffic.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video