Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2002 Week 1 Hansard (12 December) . . Page.. 134 ..
MS TUCKER (continuing):
If we are serious as a parliament about sustainability and reducing our contribution to greenhouse emissions, we have to acknowledge that our emissions in the ACT are increasing due to transport. Seriously changing the social habits of the community requires leadership and commitment from the parliament, and that is really what is at the basis of this motion. It is a totally contradictory position to say, "We want integrated transport" and "We'll build a road now."
MR CORBELL (Minister for Education, Youth and Family Services, Minister for Planning and Minister for Industrial Relations) (12.20): Mr Speaker, this is an important issue. It is an important issue which previous Assemblies and indeed the broader Canberra community have been discussing for a considerable period of time.
I think at the outset it is important for members to understand the full context in which Ms Tucker has moved this motion today, and the context is that the Greens' policy position is that they do not support the construction of the road. It is not about trying alternatives prior to constructing the road. The Greens' position is that they do not support the construction of that road. They do not support that position. So that is what drives the position, and I have to stress that the government has a disagreement with Ms Tucker on that approach.
But there are many substantive items in the motion that Ms Tucker has moved today which the government does agree with. The fact is that this government does believe that the Gungahlin Drive extension is needed to meet the transport needs of the growing Gungahlin community. But we accept that it is only part of the solution-it is not the entire solution; it can never be the entire solution-and that moves towards more sustainable transport practice are required. But that said, we do need to identify the significant equity issue at stake here, and that is ensuring that there is an effective north/south link for our arterial transport infrastructure, and the link from Gungahlin to the Glenloch interchange is the missing link that needs to be addressed.
This government has been elected with a very clear mandate and a very clear position on the Gungahlin Drive extension. We intend to proceed with that commitment, which is to build the Gungahlin Drive extension, build it in accordance with the current capital works budget timetable, and build it on the western alignment. That is the commitment we took to the election; that is the commitment we will seek to implement.
To be fair, the debate about the Gungahlin Drive extension and whether or not it will proceed has already taken place. It has been decided in this Assembly by a majority of members for a considerable period of time, and it was decided more generally, I would argue, on October 20.
We believe that the Gungahlin Drive extension on an alignment to the west of the Australian Institute of Sport is needed as soon as practicable to provide adequate access to the growing Gungahlin area. To delay the construction of the Gungahlin Drive extension would seriously disadvantage Gungahlin residents, and that is not a step we are prepared to endorse.
The second part of Ms Tucker's motion essentially confirms and outlines a number of measures which I am very proud to say are part of this government's election commitments, and these include other transport options that should be developed in