Page 4938 - Week 15 - Thursday, 15 December 2005
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
other events. The government’s commitment to making our city centre a vital part of our community is very clear.
The government is also focusing strongly on issues around sustainable transport. As discussed in question time today, the Belconnen to city busway, Gungahlin to city and Tuggeranong to city bus priority measures are part of a future network of intertown dedicated public transport routes, with $6 million already being allocated for forward design, planning and engineering analysis.
A real-time passenger information system is being rolled out to provide greater reliability of information for people using public transport in Canberra, and a city bus loop is currently being scoped to link in with improvements to the existing bus network. This will enable the gradual reduction in focus on a single dedicated bus interchange, with many of the antisocial behaviours we see as a consequence of that.
The task force the government commissioned also looked at a range of planning and development issues, including the National Capital Authority controls, submissions from the community, community safety, traffic analysis, car parking, public transport, pedestrian movement, economic analysis, financing, heritage, cultural activities and maintenance of the public realm. The task force approach has been to establish the principles and policy framework to provide the future planning and development direction for the City Hill precinct and our city centre overall, to create and maintain a thriving and vibrant city centre.
The government is pleased to support the National Capital Authority’s proposals to incorporate these principles into the national capital plan. These principles can be translated into an indicative development plan that can be refined, adapted and implemented over the medium to long term. In conjunction, the government believes there is a logical sequence of development of the city centre reflected through the projects I have already outlined to members. This follows a pattern of incremental growth that will maximise returns to the community, maximise utilisation of existing infrastructure and help defray the cost of new infrastructure.
The task force debated at length the form of governance that is most likely to achieve the recommended objectives. In the government’s view, the cost of establishing a new statutory authority simply cannot be justified. The reality check provided by the Hill PDA report, backed up by the observations of the task force, which I have not seen challenged in any substantive way by those opposite or outside of this place, meant that another statutory authority—which is in itself costly to establish—and another level of bureaucracy would have little or almost nothing to do in the first five years. There was also a failure to recognise all the precondition work that has been and continues to be carried out by ACTPLA, the Land Development Agency, the Canberra Central Taskforce, the Department of Treasury and so on, so that when the market is right a future government can act on implementing the development of the City Hill precinct in a well considered and financially responsible manner.
The task force considered the option of a development authority, similar to the one proposed and voted down yesterday by the opposition, but concluded that this approach was not appropriate for Canberra central. It formed the view that the desirable model should have a clear focus and provide skilled policy input to government but should not
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .