Page 5379 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 16 November 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
It is interesting that we do see amendments being circulated by the Greens. Something we on this side of the chamber did wonder about was whether the Greens would be supporting this. In some ways they are between a rock and a hard place because they never like supporting Liberal motions—never like it—even when they are logical, even when they are rational, even when they make perfect sense and the community is behind them. The Greens have been deathly silent on this issue of the T2 lane. But I am pleased today that the amendments circulated by Ms Bresnan, the Greens’ transport spokesperson, do point to the fact that they do want to see the T2 lane reinstated on Adelaide Avenue. They go on to also discuss some other information that they would like from the government, especially with regard to carpooling and the T2, T3 and T4 lanes.
I wonder whether the government’s analysis has actually included T4 lanes and whether most ACTION buses could drive in a T4 lane, because what we do know is that the average ACTION day includes 12,000 kilometres of dead running—that is when there is just a bus driver—so not even a bus when it is dead running can drive in the bus lane or the T2 lane. So you really wonder whether the old motorcycle with a sidecar is doing more for our environment than the empty ACTION bus.
It is very interesting that finally we have a position from the Greens. I think it would have been a very difficult one for them to make, but I am glad that it does support the stance that the Liberals have had—that we need to do more for motorists on Adelaide Avenue and that the way to do that would be to reinstate the T2 lane as was in place from 2008 until Monday.
What also would be interesting to see would be how much the government has spent on telling motorists that it was going to be closing down the T2 lane, because we had variable message boards up and we had other communication channels utilised by the ACT government. For a policy which was a bad one, for a policy that this motion calls on the government to overturn, it seems that a fair bit of money, a fair bit of taxpayers’ money, has already been spent on conveying a message to Canberrans that car pooling is not a good option, that car pooling is not encouraged in the ACT, that trying to do your bit to alleviate traffic congestion in and around our arterial roads and in our town centres is not encouraged. That is the message that this minister has given.
The minister may say that what we are doing is irresponsible from a safety point of view. I am sure he is going to do that. I am sure he is going to try and cite a whole heap of evidence to say that this is reckless and this is putting people’s lives at risk. But the fact is that there is risk when you drive on any road, and most motorists deem it to be an acceptable level of risk. That is why they drive. That is why they hop in their car. That is why they leave their house each day.
We should be doing all we reasonably can to make our roads safer. But we also need to make sure that we are in equilibrium between making our roads safer and making our roads accessible. At the moment when you have a stretch of bitumen that goes for six or seven kilometres and which is only used by a few buses a day, relatively speaking, that is not a good use of resources, it is not a good use of taxpayers’ money and it is definitely not a good use of the precious time of Canberrans.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video