❓ The Minister for Planning and Infrastructure provides an update on Bike Week and the government's commitment to sustainable transport, highlighting investments in cycling infrastructure and criticising the opposition's focus on roads.
AnsweredQoN 51Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
Will the minister provide an update on Bike Week and the Government’s commitment to a sustainable transport policy? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for Perth for the question. Of course, he is a keen cyclist, like so many members on this side of the House. Tomorrow the first event of Bike Week will kick off with the parliamentarians’ bike ride. As we know, Bike Week is a really important part of the promotion of cycling as a transport, health and recreational endeavour. This year’s focus of Bike Week is to get people to use their bikes and not their cars on short trips, particularly to local shops, video stores and other neighbourhood destinations. Mr R.F. Johnson: Do you do that? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I do indeed. Every Sunday I get on my bike. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! I am sure that many members do not wish to hear the answer, but a number of members do want to hear it. I urge members to allow the minister to give her answer. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Bike to Work breakfast will be held on Friday in Forrest Chase. More than 3 000 people are expected to cycle to the city to enjoy that. The Government has a proud record with cycling. Since coming to government it has invested some $48 million across Western Australia on cycle infrastructure. The Government has an ambitious plan, which is, by the year 2010, to increase the number of cycling trips to eight per cent of all trips made. It is increasingly important to ensure that we provide for people healthy, effective and efficient transport and travel choices. Dr J.M. Woollard interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The Liberal for greenhouse gases is again interjecting. Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for Perth for the question. Of course, he is a keen cyclist, like so many members on this side of the House. Tomorrow the first event of Bike Week will kick off with the parliamentarians’ bike ride. As we know, Bike Week is a really important part of the promotion of cycling as a transport, health and recreational endeavour. This year’s focus of Bike Week is to get people to use their bikes and not their cars on short trips, particularly to local shops, video stores and other neighbourhood destinations. Mr R.F. Johnson: Do you do that? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I do indeed. Every Sunday I get on my bike. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! I am sure that many members do not wish to hear the answer, but a number of members do want to hear it. I urge members to allow the minister to give her answer. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Bike to Work breakfast will be held on Friday in Forrest Chase. More than 3 000 people are expected to cycle to the city to enjoy that. The Government has a proud record with cycling. Since coming to government it has invested some $48 million across Western Australia on cycle infrastructure. The Government has an ambitious plan, which is, by the year 2010, to increase the number of cycling trips to eight per cent of all trips made. It is increasingly important to ensure that we provide for people healthy, effective and efficient transport and travel choices. Dr J.M. Woollard interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The Liberal for greenhouse gases is again interjecting. Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
I thank the member for Perth for the question. Of course, he is a keen cyclist, like so many members on this side of the House. Tomorrow the first event of Bike Week will kick off with the parliamentarians’ bike ride. As we know, Bike Week is a really important part of the promotion of cycling as a transport, health and recreational endeavour. This year’s focus of Bike Week is to get people to use their bikes and not their cars on short trips, particularly to local shops, video stores and other neighbourhood destinations. Mr R.F. Johnson: Do you do that? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I do indeed. Every Sunday I get on my bike. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! I am sure that many members do not wish to hear the answer, but a number of members do want to hear it. I urge members to allow the minister to give her answer. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Bike to Work breakfast will be held on Friday in Forrest Chase. More than 3 000 people are expected to cycle to the city to enjoy that. The Government has a proud record with cycling. Since coming to government it has invested some $48 million across Western Australia on cycle infrastructure. The Government has an ambitious plan, which is, by the year 2010, to increase the number of cycling trips to eight per cent of all trips made. It is increasingly important to ensure that we provide for people healthy, effective and efficient transport and travel choices. Dr J.M. Woollard interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The Liberal for greenhouse gases is again interjecting. Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
Mr R.F. Johnson: Do you do that? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I do indeed. Every Sunday I get on my bike. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! I am sure that many members do not wish to hear the answer, but a number of members do want to hear it. I urge members to allow the minister to give her answer. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Bike to Work breakfast will be held on Friday in Forrest Chase. More than 3 000 people are expected to cycle to the city to enjoy that. The Government has a proud record with cycling. Since coming to government it has invested some $48 million across Western Australia on cycle infrastructure. The Government has an ambitious plan, which is, by the year 2010, to increase the number of cycling trips to eight per cent of all trips made. It is increasingly important to ensure that we provide for people healthy, effective and efficient transport and travel choices. Dr J.M. Woollard interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The Liberal for greenhouse gases is again interjecting. Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I do indeed. Every Sunday I get on my bike. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! I am sure that many members do not wish to hear the answer, but a number of members do want to hear it. I urge members to allow the minister to give her answer. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Bike to Work breakfast will be held on Friday in Forrest Chase. More than 3 000 people are expected to cycle to the city to enjoy that. The Government has a proud record with cycling. Since coming to government it has invested some $48 million across Western Australia on cycle infrastructure. The Government has an ambitious plan, which is, by the year 2010, to increase the number of cycling trips to eight per cent of all trips made. It is increasingly important to ensure that we provide for people healthy, effective and efficient transport and travel choices. Dr J.M. Woollard interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The Liberal for greenhouse gases is again interjecting. Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! I am sure that many members do not wish to hear the answer, but a number of members do want to hear it. I urge members to allow the minister to give her answer. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Bike to Work breakfast will be held on Friday in Forrest Chase. More than 3 000 people are expected to cycle to the city to enjoy that. The Government has a proud record with cycling. Since coming to government it has invested some $48 million across Western Australia on cycle infrastructure. The Government has an ambitious plan, which is, by the year 2010, to increase the number of cycling trips to eight per cent of all trips made. It is increasingly important to ensure that we provide for people healthy, effective and efficient transport and travel choices. Dr J.M. Woollard interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The Liberal for greenhouse gases is again interjecting. Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
The SPEAKER: Members! I am sure that many members do not wish to hear the answer, but a number of members do want to hear it. I urge members to allow the minister to give her answer. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Bike to Work breakfast will be held on Friday in Forrest Chase. More than 3 000 people are expected to cycle to the city to enjoy that. The Government has a proud record with cycling. Since coming to government it has invested some $48 million across Western Australia on cycle infrastructure. The Government has an ambitious plan, which is, by the year 2010, to increase the number of cycling trips to eight per cent of all trips made. It is increasingly important to ensure that we provide for people healthy, effective and efficient transport and travel choices. Dr J.M. Woollard interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The Liberal for greenhouse gases is again interjecting. Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Bike to Work breakfast will be held on Friday in Forrest Chase. More than 3 000 people are expected to cycle to the city to enjoy that. The Government has a proud record with cycling. Since coming to government it has invested some $48 million across Western Australia on cycle infrastructure. The Government has an ambitious plan, which is, by the year 2010, to increase the number of cycling trips to eight per cent of all trips made. It is increasingly important to ensure that we provide for people healthy, effective and efficient transport and travel choices. Dr J.M. Woollard interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The Liberal for greenhouse gases is again interjecting. Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
Dr J.M. Woollard interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The Liberal for greenhouse gases is again interjecting. Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The Liberal for greenhouse gases is again interjecting. Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN replied: I thank the member for Perth for the question. Of course, he is a keen cyclist, like so many members on this side of the House. Tomorrow the first event of Bike Week will kick off with the parliamentarians’ bike ride. As we know, Bike Week is a really important part of the promotion of cycling as a transport, health and recreational endeavour. This year’s focus of Bike Week is to get people to use their bikes and not their cars on short trips, particularly to local shops, video stores and other neighbourhood destinations. Mr R.F. Johnson: Do you do that? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I do indeed. Every Sunday I get on my bike. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! I am sure that many members do not wish to hear the answer, but a number of members do want to hear it. I urge members to allow the minister to give her answer. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Bike to Work breakfast will be held on Friday in Forrest Chase. More than 3 000 people are expected to cycle to the city to enjoy that. The Government has a proud record with cycling. Since coming to government it has invested some $48 million across Western Australia on cycle infrastructure. The Government has an ambitious plan, which is, by the year 2010, to increase the number of cycling trips to eight per cent of all trips made. It is increasingly important to ensure that we provide for people healthy, effective and efficient transport and travel choices. Dr J.M. Woollard interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The Liberal for greenhouse gases is again interjecting. Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
I thank the member for Perth for the question. Of course, he is a keen cyclist, like so many members on this side of the House. Tomorrow the first event of Bike Week will kick off with the parliamentarians’ bike ride. As we know, Bike Week is a really important part of the promotion of cycling as a transport, health and recreational endeavour. This year’s focus of Bike Week is to get people to use their bikes and not their cars on short trips, particularly to local shops, video stores and other neighbourhood destinations. Mr R.F. Johnson: Do you do that? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I do indeed. Every Sunday I get on my bike. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! I am sure that many members do not wish to hear the answer, but a number of members do want to hear it. I urge members to allow the minister to give her answer. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Bike to Work breakfast will be held on Friday in Forrest Chase. More than 3 000 people are expected to cycle to the city to enjoy that. The Government has a proud record with cycling. Since coming to government it has invested some $48 million across Western Australia on cycle infrastructure. The Government has an ambitious plan, which is, by the year 2010, to increase the number of cycling trips to eight per cent of all trips made. It is increasingly important to ensure that we provide for people healthy, effective and efficient transport and travel choices. Dr J.M. Woollard interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The Liberal for greenhouse gases is again interjecting. Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
Mr R.F. Johnson: Do you do that? Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I do indeed. Every Sunday I get on my bike. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! I am sure that many members do not wish to hear the answer, but a number of members do want to hear it. I urge members to allow the minister to give her answer. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Bike to Work breakfast will be held on Friday in Forrest Chase. More than 3 000 people are expected to cycle to the city to enjoy that. The Government has a proud record with cycling. Since coming to government it has invested some $48 million across Western Australia on cycle infrastructure. The Government has an ambitious plan, which is, by the year 2010, to increase the number of cycling trips to eight per cent of all trips made. It is increasingly important to ensure that we provide for people healthy, effective and efficient transport and travel choices. Dr J.M. Woollard interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The Liberal for greenhouse gases is again interjecting. Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: I do indeed. Every Sunday I get on my bike. Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! I am sure that many members do not wish to hear the answer, but a number of members do want to hear it. I urge members to allow the minister to give her answer. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Bike to Work breakfast will be held on Friday in Forrest Chase. More than 3 000 people are expected to cycle to the city to enjoy that. The Government has a proud record with cycling. Since coming to government it has invested some $48 million across Western Australia on cycle infrastructure. The Government has an ambitious plan, which is, by the year 2010, to increase the number of cycling trips to eight per cent of all trips made. It is increasingly important to ensure that we provide for people healthy, effective and efficient transport and travel choices. Dr J.M. Woollard interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The Liberal for greenhouse gases is again interjecting. Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
Several members interjected. The SPEAKER: Members! I am sure that many members do not wish to hear the answer, but a number of members do want to hear it. I urge members to allow the minister to give her answer. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Bike to Work breakfast will be held on Friday in Forrest Chase. More than 3 000 people are expected to cycle to the city to enjoy that. The Government has a proud record with cycling. Since coming to government it has invested some $48 million across Western Australia on cycle infrastructure. The Government has an ambitious plan, which is, by the year 2010, to increase the number of cycling trips to eight per cent of all trips made. It is increasingly important to ensure that we provide for people healthy, effective and efficient transport and travel choices. Dr J.M. Woollard interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The Liberal for greenhouse gases is again interjecting. Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
The SPEAKER: Members! I am sure that many members do not wish to hear the answer, but a number of members do want to hear it. I urge members to allow the minister to give her answer. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Bike to Work breakfast will be held on Friday in Forrest Chase. More than 3 000 people are expected to cycle to the city to enjoy that. The Government has a proud record with cycling. Since coming to government it has invested some $48 million across Western Australia on cycle infrastructure. The Government has an ambitious plan, which is, by the year 2010, to increase the number of cycling trips to eight per cent of all trips made. It is increasingly important to ensure that we provide for people healthy, effective and efficient transport and travel choices. Dr J.M. Woollard interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The Liberal for greenhouse gases is again interjecting. Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: Thank you, Mr Speaker. The Bike to Work breakfast will be held on Friday in Forrest Chase. More than 3 000 people are expected to cycle to the city to enjoy that. The Government has a proud record with cycling. Since coming to government it has invested some $48 million across Western Australia on cycle infrastructure. The Government has an ambitious plan, which is, by the year 2010, to increase the number of cycling trips to eight per cent of all trips made. It is increasingly important to ensure that we provide for people healthy, effective and efficient transport and travel choices. Dr J.M. Woollard interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The Liberal for greenhouse gases is again interjecting. Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
Dr J.M. Woollard interjected. Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The Liberal for greenhouse gases is again interjecting. Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
Ms A.J. MacTIERNAN: The Liberal for greenhouse gases is again interjecting. Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
Unfortunately, we can have very little confidence that the Opposition’s heir apparent to the coalition transport throne has this broader vision of transport modes other than the motor car. I am sure that Bike Week will be an occasion for members to note the member for Avon’s comments about cycle paths when he said that they were a waste of money and like the Great Wall of China. He sledged various projects. Ironically, he even sledged projects that had been approved in principle by his colleague in the upper House. The particular cycle track that he was so virulently opposed to attracts some 500 cyclists today - I am sure more than the numbers on the roads in and out of Binnu. The Government has spent $10.5 million on infrastructure for regional cycle paths. The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
The point that I want to make is that National Party members have put up their hands and said that they want the transport portfolio, but what they really want is the roads portfolio. Roads are important. We have spent $2.25 billion of state funds on roads since coming to government. However, we recognise that transport involves more than roads. This is not what we see with the National Party. Transport has always equalled roads for the National Party. When the transport portfolio is in the hands of the National Party, we can turn the clock back to the good old days when cars and trucks ruled the roost without challenge and the spread of bitumen was self-evidently a desirable goal. Let us look at what we saw under the stewardship of the National Party. We saw railway lines closed down, what remained of the rail network privatised, coastal shipping decimated and the integration of transport and land use planning consigned to the dustbin. The National Party does not have to worry about matters like greenhouse gases, the depletion of oil and helping members of the community to have equity of access and safety when considering increasing the number of vehicles on our roads; in fact, road congestion provides the opportunity to build more roads. When the Narrows Bridge was congested, the National Party said the solution was to build a duplicate. That is the grand vision that will be facing us if the National Party gets its paws on the transport portfolio again. It is certainly not a sustainable twenty-first century agenda. We look forward to both the member for Carine and the member for Avon joining us for tomorrow’s bike ride. We can provide a tandem bike and watch who peddles hardest.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.