Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2004 Week 07 Hansard (Tuesday, 29 June 2004) . . Page.. 2963 ..

necessary. But I think I have mentioned in this place before that the engineers assure us that if that does not happen within six months the roads will all break up. We have never waited those six months to see whether they do break up. So I am none the wiser or the better off for this.

In the overall scheme of things it appears strange that the outcome for the 2003-04 community path maintenance program showed that 20,000 square metres of path maintenance was to be carried out at a cost of $2.7 million, which equated to $136 per square metre. However in this budget we see that 20,000 square metres—the same number—of community path will cost $3 million. This equates to $150 a square metre. This is a $20 increase. This is much greater than the CPI—and it is for the same number of square metres. This is a good case of spending more and getting less.

The same thing has happened with the municipal roads maintenance. The road maintenance for 2003-04 was 97 lane-kilometres at a cost of $58,146 per kilometre. In this budget however, we see only 95 lane-kilometres of planned maintenance at a cost of $69,514 per kilometre. We have two kilometres less and a whopping $11,386 per kilometre increase in cost. I repeat: spending more, getting less. That matter could be investigated.

The third matter I wish to speak about—as my colleague Mrs Dunne indicated—is graffiti. Once again, this government is allocating money to clean up graffiti. It is also putting in some new legislation—which certainly has the support of this side of the house—that will enable graffiti to be cleaned off private property without the consent of the owners. I understand the problem: sometimes the owners cannot be found or they are out at work. There is also provision for reducing the amount of time that abandoned cars can be removed in.

However, the problem in making these moves is that the government is still not addressing the problem of this type of vandalism. There is no attempt being made to control the people who are doing this. This can be done by various means. I have referred to it as “carrot and stick”. But in its approach to vandalism the government has only the carrot. The rabbits over there are offering only the carrot and not the stick. I believe that the people of the ACT want some very firm action taken against graffiti vandals. As far as this side of the house is concerned, we should deliver on it.

MS DUNDAS (10.13): As has already been noted, it is disappointing that this budget leaves a lot to be desired in areas of waste management and greenhouse gas abatement. Yet again, there is no funding for kerbside collection of compostable waste and no funding for a disposable facility for commercial kitchen waste. I have trouble seeing how we are going to achieve the NOWaste by 2010 target.

There is also no commitment to recycling bins in public places. The government’s response to the Estimates Committee indicated that it would try to encourage householders to have compost heaps working in their backyards to take some of the putrescible waste. This is another government idea and a government initiative that leaves renters out in the cold. They are a significant part of the ACT housing market. Yet so many initiatives targeted in terms of housing efficiency, water efficiency strategies and now our waste efficiency strategies do not benefit them at all. Unless our approach

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .