Page 139 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 12 February 2020
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
A feasibility study is another example of what they do best: wasting ratepayers’ money and continuing to gouge hardworking Canberrans. Why do we need a feasibility study for parking inspectors to wait just 10 minutes before issuing a ticket? Just get on and do it. Make no mistake, Mr Barr and his government have an addiction—an addiction to revenue. Whether it be fines, fees or charges, this government cannot take enough of Canberrans’ hard-earned money. If Mr Barr ever has to choose between revenue and ratepayers, he will always choose revenue, every single time.
Parking fine revenue went up by $3.3 million last year. This was a 26 per cent increase in revenue over 12 months. Mr Barr was quoted at the time as saying that fines are voluntary, and people should do the right thing. We on this side of the chamber do believe that Canberrans by and large are trying to do the right thing and that they are not deliberately flouting laws. A grace period would go a very long way in helping people, particularly when there is an unexpected queue in the supermarket, when your coffee takes just a little bit longer than anticipated or, as I have often encountered, when the time on the parking machine is actually five to seven minutes fast.
The hypocrisy of 1(d) in Mr Pettersson’s motion today is quite laughable. Equitable access to parking options remains an important part of living in our city. In my electorate alone, there are countless local shops where parking facilities have not been upgraded in years and, in fact, car parks continue to be removed. Even in off-peak periods, car parks remain a premium in many locations. This does not just frustrate local residents; it has a huge impact on local business and therefore on our economy.
Really, a grace period is the very least this government could do, given its complete unwillingness to provide any form of quality services to Canberra’s drivers. Yes, we support grace periods, but let us not be under any illusions. This government has not, does not and will not support Canberrans who dare to use their car to work and live in our city.
Ms Lawder’s amendment to Ms Le Couteur’s proposed amendment negatived.
MR PETTERSSON (Yerrabi) (11.34): I want to thank all the members who spoke in support of this this motion. Some were more direct in their support than others but, surprisingly, all were in support. This motion calls for a commonsense approach to parking fines that will, hopefully, make Canberra an even better place to live. We, as representatives of our communities, should be looking at every creative way possible to ease the burden and stress that can sometimes fall upon our community. The introduction of grace periods for people who have paid for their parking is one way that we can make life a little bit better.
This approach means that we can target our resources better. Those who are trying to abuse our parking system should be the target. This gives leeway to the 99 per cent of Canberrans who try to do the right thing by paying for their parking. There are many times when a person could have a reasonable explanation for being a few minutes late to their car, from having to wait at the bank to having a doctor’s appointment or being stuck in a queue at the shops.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video