Page 3369 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 23 September 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Mr Rattenbury seemed to be accusing Mrs Jones of having enthusiasm for this project because it is in her electorate. Good on her, I say. That is her job—to stand up for her electorate. Good on Mrs Jones. The irony is that Mr Rattenbury would accuse Mrs Jones of supporting a duplication of a road in her electorate when we know that he is driving this government to spend $1 billion on a tram. I am sure it is entirely coincidental that the light rail happens to go through his electorate. I am sure his enthusiasm for that project has nothing to do with the fact that it goes through his electorate. I am sure Ms Fitzharris, who is about to speak—she looks very eager to speak—has no enthusiasm for light rail simply because it goes to her electorate. No, no; I am sure that is not the case. It is just a coincidence, isn’t it, that Mr Rattenbury loves light rail so much that it happens to go through his electorate?
The Canberra Liberals, Madam Speaker, as you saw from this announcement from the Canberra Liberals about the duplication of Cotter Road, are focused on all of Canberra. Mr Rattenbury and this government, because he is driving them to spend a billion dollars, have got a much greater focus on about the three per cent of people who will be able to access this, who will be able to walk to the light rail. Mr Rattenbury denies being anti-car, but read his speech. Read his speech about wanting modal shift, about wanting fewer people in cars. You will see from his speech, and also from the motion, that he is anti-car.
Mr Rattenbury has the audacity to say there are other budget priorities and community needs, other project priorities and community needs. It is his view that this duplication does not need to be considered for years. What could be the community need, the other budget pressures, that mean that $23 million or $25 million for a road duplication that is needed by the people of Weston Creek and Molonglo is not a priority for Mr Rattenbury but somehow a billion dollars on a tram in his electorate is a priority? This is a speech from Mr Rattenbury that clearly outlines his ideology and how that ideology is driving budget pressures and priorities.
It is a billion dollars. Mr Rattenbury was talking about modal shift and about people getting onto light rail. He is basically saying that if you are a young mum in Weston Creek you should be catching a bus to go to light rail. Is that what Mr Rattenbury wants to say? No. Mr Rattenbury is saying that you should be stuck in traffic—that we should not get ahead of the game, that we should not plan for the future. Mr Gentleman outlined the increase in traffic flows from 15,000 to 18,000 just in the course of a few years. Mr Rattenbury is saying we should not get ahead of that—that we should wait until it is so congested that people are waiting an extraordinary amount of time on that road because Mr Rattenbury’s budget pressures, budget priorities, are on light rail.
Unfortunately, it is not just Mr Rattenbury. Although the government seems to be supporting the Canberra Liberals today in our calls to duplicate that road, Mr Rattenbury makes a good point—that is, if you are spending a billion dollars on a tram, there is a lot pressure on the budget that means you cannot do other things.
Madam Speaker, we will not be supporting Mr Rattenbury’s ideologically driven anti-car, anti-family, anti-Weston Creek, anti-Molonglo amendment today. I support
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video