Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . . Video

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2010 Week 08 Hansard (Wednesday, 18 August 2010) . . Page.. 3571 ..


Too often we see in Canberra the government going gung-ho in selling blocks of land to get the stamp duty and to get the land sales but not actually backing up the residents with infrastructure prior to demand being there. What we are seeing is infrastructure reaching near capacity before this government responds. There is no better example of that than the Gungahlin Drive extension. There was obviously a need for a dual carriageway for a very long time, yet the government refused to take action until the last minute, before the last territory election. They committed only after the Liberals had made that very commitment.

Further to Ms Le Couteur’s motion, it is worth while calling upon the government to develop road, parking, cycling, pedestrian and public transport infrastructure before existing infrastructure reaches capacity. I understand that Ms Le Couteur may object to this. She may well say that we should just be planning for it. I think we should not just be planning for infrastructure before existing infrastructure reaches capacity; we should, in fact, be rolling it out. We should, in fact, be developing it. It is all very well to have a plan, but if the plan is not implemented then we are no better off than we are at the moment.

I note that Ms Le Couteur mentioned the greater Civic plan, the Northbourne feasibility study and also the Cardno Young review of Bunda Street. These are significant and they certainly should be taken into consideration. Whether that should necessarily hold up other works, I am not completely sure. For that reason, I think that it is worth amending paragraph (1) of Ms Le Couteur’s motion. I will be moving an amendment. My amendment will replace parts of (1) and (2) but also add to (3).

MR SPEAKER: Mr Coe, if I might interrupt you, the secretariat does not have your amendment.

MR COE: I am about to table that. I am sorry, it has only just been finalised. Paragraph (3) would read:

calls upon the Government to:

(a) develop road, parking, cycling, pedestrian and public transport infrastructure before existing infrastructure reaches capacity;

(b) ensure that roadworks and rehabilitation are not undertaken on areas that are subject to incomplete community consultation or planning processes;

(c) ensure that, when construction works interrupt pedestrian and cycle routes, there are safe, convenient and well signposted alternative routes made available from the start of the works and the public is made aware of alternative arrangements prior to commencement of works; and

(d) implement a project management strategy for roadworks and other construction that minimises disruption to travel routes and considers the long-term use of roads, footpaths, cycleways or other traffic infrastructure.”.

Paragraph (3)(d) is not dissimilar to Ms Le Couteur’s motion. I move the amendment:


Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Sittings . . . . PDF . . . . Video