Page 4216 - Week 10 - Wednesday, 21 September 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
that we want action sooner rather than later. But what we have seen from the Liberal and Labor parties is no action and not even much in the way of positive words.
Possibly the most positive thing is that both of them acknowledge the relationship between planning and transport. Mr Seselja got it wrong about the lease variation charge. He clearly has not been paying attention. The Greens have negotiated with the government on the lease variation charge that there will be an opportunity to waive the charge for development along transport routes. Mr Seselja, Liberal Party—pay attention to this. The fact there is a relationship is one of the reasons why we need action on this sooner rather than later. From a planning point of view, we know considerable work is being undertaken on the Northbourne Avenue precinct. There is a draft variation 310 out on this subject and that, as well as the light rail issues and the other transport issues on Northbourne Avenue, is currently a matter of considerable public debate and decision. It is important that we make this decision now.
One of the reasons it is important is to ensure that the government gets the full financial benefit out of its decisions, because there will be an increase in the value of land which fronts onto light rail. I would like to see the ACT government make its decisions early enough so it can actually take advantage of that increase in land value rather than just the private sector which had the foresight to buy land which will become more valuable, because I fear that is what is going to happen. By the time the government gets around to actually doing a light rail project, all the land along the project will have been sold and the government will not be in a position to reap the financial benefits it should reap from it.
Both sides said, “Well, Greens, you haven’t actually delivered a rail project.” I unfortunately have to point out to the Liberal and Labor parties that we are on the crossbench. We are trying as hard as we can to do this from the crossbench, but we are not actually part of government, which makes it a trifle difficult to deliver a large engineering project on the ground. We are trying—Ms Bresnan, in particular—as hard as we can to do it.
Looking some more at this motion, one of the areas neither Liberal nor Labor really looked at was the cross-border transport coordination. It is something we need more of, and Ms Bresnan’s motion called for this specifically in relation to regional rail. We have existing rail lines going to Bungendore and Cooma. I admit the one to Cooma is not currently being used, but these are things which could be better exploited. The government should be talking to New South Wales and local councils about revitalising them. This would have benefits for the whole region.
Talking about light rail, I would like to say a bit more about the values in terms of the permanent values. I talked about values in terms of land use, but it is also in terms of lower operating costs. I know this is something which exercises the mind of the Liberal Party considerably—it was one of their questions today. The operating costs of light rail are usually cheaper than those of buses, although the capital cost is higher. As Ms Bresnan says, high speed rail is something the ACT government should be pursuing enthusiastically, and I am glad to hear that Mr Corbell at least mentioned some degree of enthusiasm. This is going to make a significant difference to Canberra.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video