Page 4093 - Week 13 - Thursday, 6 December 2007
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
Before the government releases more land, we must ensure that the development of this land will have the smallest ecological footprint possible. We must also ensure that important ecological areas and communities are protected and withdrawn from land release options. We know that loss of habitat is the most immediate threat facing our endemically endangered species.
Only around five per cent of the ACT’s native grasslands remain, which is why there is currently an inquiry into this issue. There is a very real threat of extinction to our unique native species which we here in this place have the responsibility to protect for the species sake, as well as our own, and for future generations.
Urban sprawl needs to be curtailed. We cannot continue to develop on areas of ecological significance. On the other hand, we know that people need homes to live in, and we have a shortage of those in the ACT. The Greens support urban infill as one option, but there are limits to this of course. Urban infill gives us the opportunity to make existing communities more efficient, especially in terms of making public transport more viable. But we do need to take into account the needs and wishes of existing residents, as well as ensuring that we keep our suburbs liveable, whilst maintaining the character of the bush capital. This is by no means an easy task, and it is not a simple matter of more land which can or cannot be released.
The ACT needs to have a community-wide discussion about where we want our population to be and where our community is going. We hear Mr Stanhope and Canberra’s business community talking about 500,000 people. Where does that figure come from? How big should we be? Where should we develop? What are our resource limits?
Water, energy and land are all finite, and we are starting to push upon our borders with New South Wales in a few places now. I think most can accept that our resources are limited. If we accept intergenerational equity as a guiding principle, it is incumbent upon us to ensure that we are not leaving less for our children than we have had for ourselves. Our immediate priority must be to ensure that development that does take place is truly sustainable and not token greenwash. We do not have the time or the resources for greenwash.
The knowledge and experience are around now. There are many places in the world which have managed to develop sustainably, and we need to take a leaf out of these books. If we are truly interested in being nominated a UNESCO biosphere, we would be taking this seriously. It is possible to build homes in the ACT that require essentially no heating or cooling. The lifecycle cost of these homes makes them cheaper than those currently being built, where the savings made today will be lost in the very near future. There is no reason why every new home should not be 10-star rated. Yes, that is what the system should go to. Five stars is the beginning, not the end.
Integrated planning starts right at the beginning, pre land release. Public transport infrastructure plans, for instance, should be put in place before the suburb is developed. Sustainable transport must not be an afterthought. We should have our
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .