Page 164 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 26 February 2014
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
On this note, I reference the approach of the Abbott government towards infrastructure. Mr Abbott has been very clear that his focus is on building roads, not rail. I think this is a very backward-looking approach to transport and to building the economy. I do not seek to be ideological in saying this, but when I say that the future of Australia lies more in sustainable transport infrastructure than it does in road building, I think this is something that there is plenty of evidence for, including economic analyses. If any members are interested I am certainly happy to send them through some of the further information.
On that front, I note some interesting research from December last year which assesses the potential savings for workers in the CBD if they were to travel by public transport instead of driving. This is more about the benefits to individual households, but this does relate to the wider Canberra economy, because if people are saving money on their individual transport costs, they certainly have that money to spend in other places and to drive other elements of the economy.
The research showed that by leaving their car at home and travelling by public transport to work five days a week, the average commuter travelling to work in the Canberra CBD would save $3,516 annually. That is an average. The range depends on what type of car the person uses and the distance they commute, from anywhere between five and 25 kilometres. The actual full range is $2,429 to $5,449.
The average annual savings a commuter can achieve by not owning a car at all—and I think this particularly goes to families not needing to purchase a second car—and commuting with public transport is $7,348 annually, the range there being $3,140 to $15,367. These are very significant differences. They are significant cost of living savings. But they are also significant when it comes to thinking about what drives the economy in the ACT.
If those individuals who made those savings were to spend them in restaurants, on various services that are offered in the community or in other ways, that would all be recycled through the economy in a way that can only be beneficial. Interestingly, even if a Canberra commuter chooses to catch a taxi occasionally, where he or she might expect to pay, say, $27 to travel 15 kilometres one way to the CBD, there are still savings. Were the frequency of taxi use to increase to an average of one or two taxis a week, the annual taxi costs would amount to $1,263 or $2,526 respectively. That is still a saving per year of several thousand dollars per household.
In conclusion, I would say that I am happy to support the motion. I think there are extensive opportunities for our economy in sustainability and green initiatives. There are great opportunities in sustainable transport infrastructure, and certainly in my role as a Greens minister I will be continuing to try to move the territory in this direction.
When it comes to Mr Hanson’s amendment, as I said earlier I think I prefer the wording that Ms Berry has put forward. We have had the discussion about public service cuts but there are just a couple of other ideological warrior-type things going on in Mr Hanson’s amendment. I note, for example, in Ms Berry’s motion at
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video