Page 5444 - Week 13 - Wednesday, 16 November 2011
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
actually recall the statement coming out about it being a temporary measure, but I am advised that there was a media release put out. The problem with this is that it was “temporary” for quite some time. People get used to using this sort of lane. It also has an impact on people’s understanding of reliability and how the road system, transit lanes and all such infrastructure operate. I think we need to recognise that problem also.
This decision appears to have been taken without any real consideration of the impact it will have on Canberra’s transport patterns. Now is the right time to step back and carefully assess the situation on Adelaide Avenue with an evidence-based approach. Will our transport needs be best served by a bus-only lane or by a T2 lane—or perhaps even a T3 or T4 lane? Where is the city placed in terms of car pooling, and how much of a disincentive to car pooling will it be to remove the T2 lane?
In making this assessment the emphasis should be on making Canberra more sustainable. Public transport is critical to making a sustainable transport system. But car pooling also plays an important part in making us a more sustainable city. The Greens have been advocates for car pooling for quite some time—for a long time, in fact—and the ACT Greens transport policy acknowledges the importance of car pooling.
In March 2010 we asked the government what it was doing about car pooling. We referred to a car pooling survey the government conducted of ACT government staff in 2008. The results of that car pooling survey show that there is support for and interest in car pooling as an alternative to commuting by car. Sixty-four per cent of respondents to this survey indicated they would consider car pooling and only 10 per cent of survey respondents said they would not consider car pooling as an alternative to private car use.
The Greens asked the government about conducting a car pool pilot via a central car pooling database that would connect staff who wished to car pool. The government’s response was that this appeared to be feasible and noted that most staff have common travel patterns. Its stated position was that it was considering supporting car pooling for government staff in the context of integrated transport planning and a range of funding priorities. That was a year and a half ago and, unfortunately, there has not been any action on this front since.
One of the amendments that I propose is that the ACT government develop options for introducing an ACT government-wide car pooling service. I have also asked that the government investigate how it can make this service available to federal government agencies. Providing this service to federal government employees would have excellent benefits to the ACT—for example, by helping to reduce congestion on ACT roads, decreasing the number of people needing to park and increasing options for people who do not have a licence or access to a work vehicle.
As we know, Canberra is a public service town and there is potential for a government car pooling service to make an important contribution. I note that Tasmania has offered a similar service for government employees called SmartShare. Car pooling can also assist in areas where bus services are not available. This is particularly timely given the government has said that industrial relations issues are affecting its ability to
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video