Page 4234 - Week 12 - Wednesday, 23 October 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
dedicated school services across Canberra is what is needed to solve the crisis this government has caused.
This ACT Labor-Greens government has failed families, Tuggeranong, Belconnen, Woden and every single person in our city who needs or wants to catch a bus on weekends. This new network has actually encouraged massive parts of this city to rely on their cars like never before.
This brings me to the hot topic of car-free days. According to Mr Rattenbury and his colleagues, Canberra is an aspiring Copenhagen or Paris that will one day be able to enjoy days and perhaps weeks of roads and avenues free from automobiles. Walkability is important and encouraging active travel and public transport patronage should be something that this city is proud of. But I hope that Mr Rattenbury’s car-free days do not fall on a Saturday when residents in Charnwood wish to catch a bus to Belconnen or on a Sunday when residents in Narrabundah want to get themselves to the city.
Mr Rattenbury will try to tell us that these car-free days will be in one part of the city or another but fails to explain that closures of Lonsdale Street or Benjamin Way will have negligible impact on Canberra’s zero emissions strategy. The inconvenient fact that Mr Rattenbury continues to ignore is that he and his colleagues of this Labor-Greens government have put more cars on our roads in the past six months than a car-free day could ever take off our roads. Their failure to provide adequate services and the reduction in suburban routes, weekend services and dedicated school bus services shows rank hypocrisy and incredible incompetence at managing our territory’s transport system.
Mr Gentleman: On a point of order, Mr Assistant Speaker, during Miss C Burch’s discussion on this matter she reflected on the decision of the Speaker in a previous debate. I understand that that is disorderly under the standing orders and she should either withdraw that reflection or go forward with a formal motion of dissent.
Ms Lawder: On the point of order, Mr Assistant Speaker, I was listening to Miss C Burch’s speech and she referred to the Speaker’s decision without any reflection on that. You might wish to review the transcript.
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Mr Pettersson): That is a sensible idea; we will look at the transcript.
MS CODY (Murrumbidgee) (3.26): That was an interesting diatribe from Miss C Burch. Her amendment refers to the transport network. I have just re-read my motion and I am going to call a point of order, Mr Assistant Speaker, on relevance as to whether Miss C Burch’s amendment is in order.
MR ASSISTANT SPEAKER: I will seek some advice.
Mr Hanson: On the point of order, in her speech Ms Cody waxed lyrical about light rail and public transport so I do not see why it would be out of order for Miss C Burch to have that in her amendment.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video