Page 203 - Week 01 - Wednesday, 14 February 2018
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
that. Aren’t we great because we’re going to deliver this and that?” There was very little on the particular issues that I raised in my motion, and I do wonder whether she was listening to my speech at all.
When she was addressing the motion and boasting of the patronage numbers having gone up, first, she completely ignored the key fact that the Chief Minister is at great pains to spruik, which is of course that Canberra has grown in population and has increased its tourist numbers. Second, the patronage may have gone up on the particular No 4 and No 6 buses, but I do wonder whether those numbers are double-counted, given that a lot of people who were required to travel on only one bus are now required to travel on both to get to where they are, because of the poor connectivity. Further, what assurance is this? Can the minister really look Dani, Susan and Frank of Narrabundah in the eye and say, “You know what? The patronage on those buses has gone up.” What reassurance is that for those people who are still missing a bus service?
The minister can quote whatever figures she likes, but it is the people who catch the bus, and it is her job as the minister for transport to provide effective public transport for all Canberrans. The fact that she has absolutely ignored the hundreds of people who have contacted my office, I am sure Miss Burch’s office and I am sure the late Mr Doszpot’s office—even Ms Le Couteur has confirmed that she has been contacted by a number of people—just demonstrates that, yet again, this government is using the fluffy words of access for all and social justice and equality but that, when faced with the cold, hard reality of the people who are directly impacted, numbers are above the people. She likes to talk about figures so much but she fails completely to mention the $130 million loss that ACTION makes each year. Why? Because public transport is an essential service that serves people.
On the lack of consultation, the minister went to great lengths to say that she undertook these consultations. Is she saying that the residents of the inner south refused to engage in the consultation process or somehow missed this consultation process? Or is she saying that the entire cancellation of the No 5 bus is a “minor change” to the route that does not require a formal consultation process? It is one or the other.
Off-peak travel for seniors is all very well but if the bus does not take you where you need to go or departs from a bus stop that you cannot reasonably walk to, the concessional price is meaningless. A flexible bus service that is free for all is all very well, but if you need to attend a medical appointment urgently then it is of no use, given that you need to book 48 hours in advance. If you need to get to a shopping centre to buy groceries and the closest bus stop is nearly a kilometre away, whatever the frequency, whatever the timetable, whatever the concessional fare—or even free—it becomes pointless.
For the minister to claim that she has consulted with the community when all that happened was, at best, information-sharing after the changes were made is just not good enough.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video