Page 2932 - Week 09 - Thursday, 13 August 2015
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
And of course there is this contradiction with the government saying that light rail is going to solve all the problems in Gungahlin, yet frantically spending money on roads in Gungahlin. You would think that if light rail is going to be this silver bullet for Gungahlin they would not need to fund upgrades of roads going in and out of Gungahlin as a town centre. It is, of course, a realisation or an acceptance from the government that light rail is not going to be the silver bullet that they claim. That is backed up by their own numbers, their own patronage numbers. Even their 2021 numbers show 15,000 people a day. Their 2031 numbers show just 20,000 people a day—20,000 people a day in 2031. And somehow that is transformational! Some 20,000 people today would not have been transformational, let alone in 2031, with such a small portion of Canberra’s population.
The government wants to position itself as the champion of road development in Gungahlin whilst also saying they are the champions of light rail. The reality is that we could be doing so much more and we could be doing it more efficiently. We could be duplicating Gundaroo Drive to the Barton Highway and then building a flyover at the roundabout. We should already have works on the ground duplicating Horse Park Drive. We should also be completing the duplication of Ashley Drive right through to Johnson Drive. And there are numerous other road projects around the territory that would have a real impact on the quality of life for Canberrans, whether they be in private motor vehicles, in taxis or in buses.
I would like to also comment on the government’s recent road resurfacing work. The resurfacing has been below par. My office has handled many complaints that have been put to us about roads in places such as Nicholls, Bruce, Aranda, Fadden, Kambah and many other suburbs across Canberra. I think there is increasing scepticism about the use of chip seal—of compacted loose gravel, in effect. Whilst it is, of course, inexpensive and it does do the job in some instances, the selection of roads on which it is used, I think, is questionable.
The surface is dependent upon fairly high traffic for it to be compacted, and when it is on roads such as in places or cul-de-sacs, you end up getting a situation where the gravel does not get compacted but seems to just gather in drains, get flicked up and get carried onto other streets. I think there needs to be a rethink as to where chip seal is used in the territory.
That was something that was discussed during the estimates committee hearings. I appreciate the information that the minister and his officials gave; however, I do not see a change of policy on the horizon. I hope that is something that TAMS can look towards doing more on in the future, looking towards other services.
I would also be keen to hear from the government how the slurry seal trial has gone. I do not think we have heard a huge amount about that to date. That is potentially a very interesting surface that would alleviate many of the concerns that some people have. However, we do not know a great deal about it at this stage, so it is something that I would very much welcome the government’s opinion on.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video