Page 3633 - Week 10 - Tuesday, 26 August 2008
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
The ACT government takes very seriously the issue of aircraft noise. I can advise the Assembly that the Chief Minister recently wrote to the airport and sought its advice on a review of the existing noise abatement areas to ensure that, as the new suburbs in Gungahlin come on line, they are adequately protected from aircraft noise. This is also true for new developments in north Watson. I am pleased to advise that the Canberra International Airport has supported this approach and has written to Airservices Australia and the commonwealth transport minister, Anthony Albanese, to formally request that Airservices Australia conduct an investigation into the safety, environmental and operational impact of an easterly extension of the Canberra noise abatement area to cover these new and existing Gungahlin suburbs. Again, I hope that Dr Foskey would realise that the commonwealth, through Airservices Australia, is responsible for noise and flight path monitoring at Australia’s major airports. As part of this monitoring, Airservices Australia prepares a detailed quarterly report on air traffic movements and noise-related information.
In addition, the Canberra airport is very active in relation to addressing aircraft noise issues and convenes the Canberra airport aircraft noise consultative forum on a quarterly basis to discuss the airport’s aircraft noise-related issues. This forum includes representatives from industry, the community, the ACT government and the Queanbeyan City Council as well as ACT and Queanbeyan community councils.
Notwithstanding this, the ACT government is firmly of the view that the airport must ensure that the information it collects and publishes in relation to aircraft noise remains accurate and objective. We insist that the airport takes all reasonable steps to minimise the impacts of noise on existing and future Canberra developments. We believe that this should include regular, independent monitoring to establish objective baseline data and regular reviews of existing noise abatement areas to ensure that new ACT and existing suburbs are properly protected from aircraft noise.
Although the commonwealth is responsible for all airport planning matters, the ACT government will continue to seek to ensure that the Australian government recognises and addresses the significant impact new airport developments are having on communities such as ours.
In closing, I thank Dr Foskey again for raising this matter. It is important that we have the opportunity to debate it in this place. But again, I note that, a few months out from an election, Dr Foskey seeks for the ACT government—
Dr Foskey: I have had that MPI in the hat for about six months.
MR BARR: Whether it is two months or eight months out from an election, the Greens are seeking to use this as an election issue when they know full well that the planning responsibility lies with the commonwealth and that the issues around the curfew also lie within the purview of the commonwealth government. Whilst it is always interesting to debate these—
Dr Foskey: What is your role then?
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .