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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2010 Week 14 Hansard (Thursday, 9 December 2010) . . Page.. 6119 ..


I move:

That the Assembly take note of the paper.

MS LE COUTEUR (Molonglo) (3.35): I would like to very briefly comment on this paper because it was, of course, the result of a Greens motion about active transport in May. I thank the government for bringing on this paper. It is a very interesting reflection of active transport in the ACT. It is also an interesting reflection of what is not in it. I note, for instance, that what is not in it is the ACT government’s current number one ask of Infrastructure Australia, the Majura Parkway. Of course, it is not part of anyone’s active transport plan.

I will be fairly brief given the day, but there are a few points I would like to make when we get to the action plans. Firstly, we talk about prioritising pedestrian, cyclist and public transport in planning traffic and urban design policies and fund them appropriately. I am a resident of the inner north; so I go down Majura Avenue fairly frequently. I notice that there are new townhouses being built there and there have been new footpaths built there.

The footpaths are too narrow to have cyclists and pedestrians. Majura Avenue is not safe for cyclists. We are still building new infrastructure that does not prioritise pedestrians or cyclists. I think this is a real pity. We are not taking these things online. In paragraph (b) it is stated:

ACTPLA has incorporated the design principles identified in the Health Spaces and Places and the International Charter of Walking …

If that is the case, I would ask why have we gone ahead with the development in Holt? We are planning to go ahead with a development in Holt which will not have any public transport in it. It is quite clear that we have said there should be public transport and that there should be bus stops every 400 metres. We are planning to do developments in the ACT that will not meet those requirements.

We talk quite a bit about travel demand management, including by converting appropriate areas into pedestrian priority spaces. I would have to say that the word is “talk”. We mention here Gungahlin and Hibberson Street. I can remember back in the 2008 election when I spent an awful lot of time in Hibberson Street in Gungahlin. My Labor companion, who was not elected for Gungahlin, presented a petition then to do something at Hibberson Street. Nothing has yet been done with Hibberson Street. We have plans; we do not yet have actions.

We talk about the safe routes for schools project. I have had representations from constituents that traffic is such that there are fewer safe routes to schools. The walking school bus is used to walk to school from Watson to Hackett. It has had to stop because it is not actually safe for the kids to cross Antill Street anymore. This report, while interesting, is not showing the whole picture.

In paragraph (e) we talk about improving cycling infrastructure. I will agree that this has improved considerably in Canberra, largely because of the agreement between the


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