Page 5357 - Week 13 - Thursday, 29 November 2018
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
(12) How many subsequent fortnightly meetings with local businesses and community groups were scheduled to plan this event, how were stakeholders notified and invited to participate and how many attended each meeting from both the local businesses involved and any local community groups.
(13) Given that within the list of private sector developments which the report states contributed to accessibility concerns for the Gungahlin Town Centre is Bunnings, how can this development be seen as linked when it was completed in late 2015 and opened on 16 December 2015 – well before the Light Rail project or other major Government construction projects in the Gungahlin area.
(14) Will any lessons be drawn from the fact the NSW Government’s Parramatta Light Rail Business Impact Assessment from August 2017 listed in the report as a case study, is a lengthy and detailed document consisting of 246 pages specifically focused on business.
(15) Given that the Canberra Metro and ACT Government Environment Impact Statement for Light Rail Stage 1 which is just 73 pages, mentions businesses just 30 times and rates the risk to local businesses as residual and therefore not warranting specific measures, does the Minister maintain that this type of analysis and planning is sufficient to protect local business.
(16) Can the Minister explain why the first three paragraphs of the Business survey findings section contain no data or evidence and instead relied on language such as “the findings suggested”, “as might be expected”, “common sentiment amongst respondents” and “anecdotal feedback”.
(17) Given that the phrase “perceived” has been used 28 times when referencing the impact reported by businesses; why has this term been ascribed to the feedback provided by businesses.
(18) What is the Minister’s response to the fact that 68 percent of businesses rated the overall support offer as “Not useful at all”.
(19) What is the Minister’s response to the fact there has been a 22 percent decrease in businesses with more than 20 employees since construction of light rail commenced.
(20) What is the Minister’s response to the slowed business growth since light rail construction commenced, going from 32 percent in the five years leading up to 2017, specifically 3.9 percent in 2015 and 8.5 percent in 2016, to now just 1 percent.
(21) Why was there no analysis of retail vacancy rates, commercial rents or rates as part of this assessment.
(22) What is the Minister’s response to the lower entry rate and higher exit rate since light rail construction commenced.
(23) Given the lessons learnt section states that a more comprehensive lessons learnt process in partnership with other stakeholders is scheduled to be performed following the construction of Light Rail Stage 1, does this mean this assessment was not comprehensive.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video