Page 1945 - Week 05 - Thursday, 5 May 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
Attorney-General via motion to report back to the Assembly on where the ACT was seeing this growth and if community corrections, for example, were being adequately supported. I look forward to a response on this matter, because that will very much go to what is being funded in the future for corrections and ensuring that we do provide options for people that do not need to go into the prison system. The Greens are concerned with the decision to cut around $407,000 for the prisoners chapel and quiet place. This is, again, a decision which requires an explanation.
This year’s transport budget contains some positive initiatives which I would like to acknowledge. The Greens called for the extension of rapid bus services to Kippax, which is in the budget, although I would argue this service needs to be delivered as a priority to southern Tuggeranong as well. Commitments made to bus transit ways and bus priority lights in the budget are also particularly welcomed, especially for the major route of Northbourne Avenue. It is positive that the government is progressing bus station designs for Barton and Dickson as well as a city layover bus facility. These are priorities from the strategic public transport network plan.
Of course, what is still needed in order to properly inform these developments is very strong targets for modal shift and transport emissions reduction, but we are still waiting for the sustainable transport action plan. I also welcome the increased catch-up funding for improving disability access at bus stops, but much work is needed to ensure all members of society have equal access to transport.
Despite these positive items though, I regret to say that the government’s overall approach to transport is still somewhat disappointing, and this is reflected in the budget indicators. Perhaps most revealing is the indicator measuring the increase in public transport modal share. I have pointed out before that the government already has a modest target, yet the achieved target was only half of this. The same had occurred for the patronage target. A common response from the government is that it is doing what it can, but there are forced budget limitations. We would argue that the real issue is about priority.
Once again, the budget numbers reveal the priorities of the government. If you tally the new capital works spending that this budget commits to sustainable transport initiatives, such as new bus stations, bus priority measures and walking and cycling infrastructure, the total is $16.3 million over four years. If you tally the new capital works this budget commits to transport initiatives, such as new roads and road widening, the total is $208 million. This is approximately 13 times more than sustainable transport infrastructure.
Lastly, I must comment on the proposed Majura parkway. The $150 million proposed for this road is borrowed money. It is also money for a project that still has no support from the commonwealth. I point out that the $150 million might be better spent on transport options for the people of Gungahlin that will last into the future, such as light rail, infrastructure such as bus priority, and fast and frequent public transport in conjunction with safety upgrades to the existing Majura Road.
As the Greens industrial relations spokesperson, I also want to comment on the budget’s response to the ongoing issues with ACTION. In addition to the recent
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video