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

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2021 Week 07 Hansard (Tuesday, 22 June 2021) . . Page.. 1894 ..

I mentioned some international headlines a little earlier, but we are creating our own headlines in Canberra. This is from the Canberra Times three weeks ago:

A scooter rider has been transferred to Canberra Hospital following an incident with a car in Turner.

The car and the scooter are believed to have collided just before 1pm on Thursday. Police arrived on scene not long after.

And this from the RiotACT late last year:

Recently released data shows nearly 60 Canberrans have presented to the emergency departments at Canberra and Calvary Hospitals with scooter-related injuries in the first few months since their introduction to the Territory.

Seven people attended Calvary Hospital, while more than 50 presented to Canberra Hospital.

They went on to quote specific cases. Those cases were just the ones involving people who presented to hospital. I would suggest that it underestimates, by some way, the number of collisions in that very short period.

All I am saying is that I am not sure that the government is seriously tackling the safety issues of e-scooters. I look forward to being proven wrong when the review is released. I look forward to much of it being released publicly so that we can have a look at that. As Mr Steel suggested, we are essentially heading in the same direction on this and I hope that we can meet up in the middle somewhere.

Going to the second part of my amendment, I understand that according to Mr Pettersson Canberra pretty much ends at the end of the parliamentary triangle, but there is a whole side of the city south of Parliament House. Those of us who live in the south often get left behind by this government. This strikes me as another example. I know that Mr Steel has already pointed to this and said, “Just because we have mentioned Gungahlin and Mitchell does not mean that we are excluding these others.” Then why single them out? Why just go with Mitchell and Gungahlin? (Time expired.)

MS ORR (Yerrabi) (4.32): I want to speak on Mr Pettersson’s substantive motion. As a member for Yerrabi, I feel that this is quite a positive for our electorate. People in Gungahlin in particular have embraced new transport methods and mixed modal methods in how they take their transportation. We have seen the great uptake of light rail and the continual support of buses. This is a good addition to our transport mix in the area and will complement what we already have in place.

I know that the Mitchell traders will be quite excited by the prospect of e-scooters and how they will help their business precinct. Overall, this is a positive addition to our electorate and I thank Mr Pettersson for bringing it forward.

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