Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video

Legislative Assembly for the ACT: 2016 Week 08 Hansard (Thursday, 11 August 2016) . . Page.. 2821 ..

For the reasons outlined above the installation of the footpath along the desire line is not considered to be safe.

When I passed this information on to the constituent who raised it with me they came back to me saying thank you for the correspondence but they had some comments on the reasons provided including:

What makes this proposal for a footpath different to many other pathways and roads around Canberra which are only designed to accept certain flood events, ie, 1 in 10, 1 in 25, et cetera? It should be pointed out to the Minister that some 100 metres north of the proposed pathway the existing pathway through the Coyne Street underpass would also be subject to similar flooding if the capacity of the pipe system is exceeded. Using the Minister’s logic, this underpass pathway is unsafe because it floods. If this is the case, then it needs to be closed until remedial work is undertaken.

On disability noncompliance my constituent said:

Walking the proposed route from north of Coyne Street south towards the Mpowerdome, the gradient of the proposed pathway into the stormwater channel is no worse than that of some other sections of pathway in the underpass area. If the pathway exiting the channel were constructed along the desire line it is possible it may not be compliant because it would exit the channel at a right angle, ie, straight up the slope. However, if it were realigned so it went across the slope, I would contend that it would be compliant for disabled users as well as being more comfortable for able users.

In conclusion—

my constituent continues—

I get the sense that this matter has not been looked at seriously by the responsible officials, and the response is simply a fob-off. The cynic in me says that this close to the election the response would have been different if this matter was not in Tuggeranong. There would be concrete being laid now.

I use that example because that echoes comments made to me by constituents at my mobile offices and my doorknocking around Tuggeranong. Residents are perplexed, they are disappointed, indeed they are angry. The phrase they most often use to me is that they feel they are neglected. Tuggeranong is neglected and they are being punished by this government. They are being neglected and punished and they are not happy about it. They do not understand why, when they pay the same rates as anyone else, they are subject to lack of work being done in their areas.

Some suburbs, as you well know, Madam Deputy Speaker—and I am not going to talk further on it tonight—are deeply aggrieved about the ongoing odour issues in Tuggeranong. Apparently the odour is coming from the tip although that is yet to be confirmed definitely by the minister. I repeat: residents in Tuggeranong tell me they are perplexed, they are disappointed and they are angry about the neglect of their area.

Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video