ACT Legislative Assembly Hansard


Advanced search

.. Previous page. . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . Search

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2014 Week 3 Hansard (10 April) . . Page.. 917..


The Committee recommends that the ACT Government undertake an in-house audit of missing links in the cycle path network, such as the Barton Highway and parts of Lake Tuggeranong.

I understand that parts of Lake Tuggeranong are being worked on at the moment, but there are still many missing links in the cyclepath network, especially the off-road network, but also the on-road network. I think it would be well worth while to ensure that whatever work has been done in respect of all the missing links in the past is brought together in a new and complete audit so that the priorities for the expansion of the cyclepath network can be rolled out efficiently.

The final recommendation I want to draw to the Assembly's attention is recommendation No 6:

The Committee recommends that the ACT Government undertake a survey of why $73.5 million in land rent sales contracts were rescinded/terminated in 2012-13.

That is a huge amount; $73.5 million worth of contracts were terminated or rescinded. I think that it would be appropriate for the government to develop a good understanding on why that would be. That sort of amount—$73.5 million—may well represent 200 to 300 individual contracts. Therefore, a huge amount of work has gone into the preparation of those contracts. It would be a missed opportunity not to look into the reasons why those contracts are not being followed through.

Finally I would like to draw the Assembly's attention to note 83 on page 20. There are a few recommendations that were not endorsed by the committee. They are that:

1. The Committee recommends that the ACT Government publish quarterly updates on the total expenditure of the Capital Metro Project.

2. The Committee recommends that the ACT Government present their rationale as to why light rail (LRT) was chosen over the bus rapid transit (BRT), despite BRT offering more than double the economic return of LRT (as per the 2012 submission to Infrastructure Australia).

The next recommendation that was not endorsed by the committee, but which is included in note 83 is:

The Committee recommends that the ACT Government present a timeline for the removal of trees (to make way for light rail) on Northbourne Avenue.

The final recommendation that I hoped would be included is:

The Committee recommends that the ACT Government publish the patronage assumptions used for the economic modelling of light rail.

In conclusion, I would like to thank the other committee members for their participation throughout this process and I commend the report to the Assembly.

Question resolved in the affirmative.


Next page . . Previous page. . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . Search


If you have special accessibility requirements in accessing information on this website,
please contact the Assembly on (02) 6205 0439 or send an email toOLA@parliament.act.gov.au
Accessibility | Copyright and Disclaimer Notice | Privacy Policy
© Legislative Assembly for the ACT