MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
THE ?? MEETING OF THE BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL,
HELD AT ROY HARVEY HOUSE,
157 ANN STREET, BRISBANE,
Dedicated to a better Brisbane
ON TUESDAY ??
AT 2PM
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
The 4399 meeting of the Brisbane City Council,
held at City Hall, Brisbane
on Tuesday 12 March 2013
at 2pm
Prepared by:
Council and Committees Support
Chief Executive’s Office
Office of the Lord Mayor and the Chief Executive Officer
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
THE 4399 MEETING OF THE BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL,
HELD AT CITY HALL, BRISBANE,
ON TUESDAY 12 MARCH 2013
Dedicated to a better Brisbane
AT 2PM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
APOLOGIES: ....................................................................................................................................................... 1
MINUTES: ............................................................................................................................................................ 1
SUSPENSION OF RULES OF PROCEDURE – MOTION ON STATE GOVERNMENT’S BUS
REVIEW ............................................................................................................................................................... 2
QUESTION TIME: ............................................................................................................................................ 29
CONSIDERATION OF COMMITTEE REPORTS: ...................................................................................... 39
ESTABLISHMENT AND COORDINATION COMMITTEE ................................................................... 39
A
COMPLETION OF LAND RESUMPTIONS, LUTWYCHE ROAD – CONSTITUTION ROAD
INTERSECTION UPGRADE ............................................................................................................... 48
B
APPROVAL OF THE FINAL BRISBANE’S FLOODSMART FUTURE STRATEGY 2012-31............ 50
INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE ........................................................................................................... 51
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – HISTORY OF BRISBANE’S CROSS RIVER BRIDGES, PART 1 54
B
PETITION – CALLING ON COUNCIL TO ADDRESS THE TRAFFIC CONCERNS IN WHITES
ROAD, MANLY WEST, WITHIN THE VICINITY OF AVEO MANLY GARDENS .............................. 55
C
PETITION – REQUESTING COUNCIL TO ADDRESS THE TRAFFIC AND PEDESTRIAN ISSUES
IN STREETS WITHIN THE MITCHELTON SCHOOL PRECINCT ................................................... 57
D
PETITION – REQUESTING COUNCIL TO CONSTRUCT A ROUNDABOUT AT THE
INTERSECTION OF ORCHID AND CLOVER STREETS IN ENOGGERA ....................................... 59
PUBLIC AND ACTIVE TRANSPORT COMMITTEE .............................................................................. 60
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – CITYCAT SEATING ..................................................................... 64
B
PETITION – CALLING ON THE LORD MAYOR TO GUARANTEE THAT PASSENGERS WILL NOT
BE AFFECTED BY THE REVIEW OF BUS ROUTES ........................................................................ 65
NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE................. 66
A
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION UNDER THE SUSTAINABLE PLANNING ACT 2009 –
PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR CARRYING OUT BUILDING WORK, PRELIMINARY
APPROVAL FOR CARRYING OUT OPERATIONAL WORK, DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR
RECONFIGURATION OF A LOT AND DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR MATERIAL CHANGE OF
USE FOR DISPLAY AND SALE ACTIVITIES, GARDEN CENTRE, SHOP, RESTAURANT AND
ANCILLARY OFFICE – 85 GARDEN ROAD AND 108 TO 144 PINE ROAD, RICHLANDS –
HYDROX NOMINEES PTY LTD ......................................................................................................... 69
ENVIRONMENT, PARKS AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE ...................................................... 74
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – THE VINEGAR FLY..................................................................... 78
B
PARK NAMING – FORMAL NAMING OF THE EXISTING PARKLAND ON MILTON ROAD,
MILTON, AS ‘FREW PARK’, AND THE PROPOSED NEW TENNIS CENTRE WITHIN THIS PARK
AS THE ‘ROY EMERSON TENNIS CENTRE’ .................................................................................... 79
FIELD SERVICES COMMITTEE ............................................................................................................... 81
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – GREEN STAR CONCRETE ......................................................... 81
BRISBANE LIFESTYLE COMMITTEE .................................................................................................... 82
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – ACTIVE AND HEALTHY PROGRAMS ....................................... 83
FINANCE, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE ....................... 84
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – DRIVING ECONOMIC VALUE THROUGH EVENTS ............... 85
CONSIDERATION OF NOTIFIED MOTION: SEQ TRANSLINK BUS NETWORK REVIEW ............ 85
PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS: ................................................................................................................ 89
[4399 (Ordinary) Meeting – 12 March 2013]
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
THE 4399 MEETING OF THE BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL,
HELD AT CITY HALL, BRISBANE,
ON TUESDAY 12 MARCH 2013
Dedicated to a better Brisbane
AT 2PM
GENERAL BUSINESS: ..................................................................................................................................... 90
QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN: .................................................................. 90
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN: ....................................... 91
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS
THE 4399 MEETING OF THE BRISBANE CITY COUNCIL,
HELD AT CITY HALL, BRISBANE,
ON TUESDAY 12 MARCH 2013
Dedicated to a better Brisbane
AT 2PM
PRESENT:
The Right Honourable the LORD MAYOR (Councillor Graham QUIRK) – LNP
The Acting Chairman of Council, Angela OWEN-TAYLOR (Parkinson) – LNP
LNP Councillors (and Wards)
Krista ADAMS (Wishart)
Matthew BOURKE (Jamboree)
Amanda COOPER (Bracken Ridge)
Vicki HOWARD (Central)
Steven HUANG (Macgregor)
Fiona KING (Marchant)
Geraldine KNAPP (The Gap)
Kim MARX (Karawatha)
Peter MATIC (Toowong)
Ian McKENZIE (Holland Park)
David McLACHLAN (Hamilton)
Ryan MURPHY (Doboy)
Adrian SCHRINNER (Chandler) (Deputy Mayor)
Julian SIMMONDS (Walter Taylor)
Norm WYNDHAM (McDowall)
Andrew WINES (Enoggera)
ALP Councillors (and Wards)
Milton DICK (Richlands) (The Leader of the
Opposition)
Helen ABRAHAMS (The Gabba) (Deputy Leader of
the Opposition)
Peter CUMMING (Wynnum Manly)
Kim FLESSER (Northgate)
Steve GRIFFITHS (Moorooka)
Victoria NEWTON (Deagon)
Independent Councillor (and Ward)
Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON (Tennyson)
OPENING OF MEETING:
The Acting Chairman, Councillor Angela Owen-Taylor, opened the meeting with prayer, and then proceeded
with the business set out in the Agenda.
APOLOGIES:
499/2012-13
An apology was submitted on behalf of the Chairman of Council, Councillor Margaret de WIT (LNP Pullenvale
Ward) and she was granted leave of absence from the meeting on the motion of Councillor Ryan MURPHY,
seconded by Councillor Kim MARX.
500/2012-13
An apology was also submitted on behalf of Councillor Shayne SUTTON (ALP Morningside), and she was
granted leave of absence from the meeting on the motion of Councillor Victoria NEWTON, seconded by
Councillor Kim FLESSER.
MINUTES:
501/2012-13
The Minutes of the 4398 meeting of Council held on 5 March 2013, copies of which had been forwarded to each
councillor, were presented, taken as read and confirmed on the motion of Councillor Ryan MURPHY, seconded
by Councillor Kim MARX.
[4399 (Ordinary) Meeting – 12 March 2013]
-2-
SUSPENSION OF RULES OF PROCEDURE – Motion on State
Government’s bus review
Acting Chairman:
Point of order, Councillor MATIC.
502/2012-13
At that time Councillor Peter MATIC moved, seconded by the DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian
SCHRINNER, that so much of the Rules of Procedure be suspended to allow him to move an urgency motion in
relation to the State Government's bus review.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor MATIC, three minutes to support urgency.
Councillor MATIC:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman. As Councillors in the Chamber would be
well aware, last week the Minister for Transport and Main Roads announced the
review of TransLink's South-East Queensland Bus Network Review, an
extensive document covering every facet of the bus travel of all Brisbane
residents.
Since then we have had the opportunity on a preliminary basis to look at that bus
review—
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman:
Order!
Councillor MATIC:
—and be able to make certain findings in the short term in regards to that.
However, there is more that needs to be done.
As Councillors would be aware, there has been previous consultation conducted
on this matter, but none of the previous consultation indicated the extent of the
review as presented by the Minister last week. There is a public opportunity for
feedback to be provided. However, given the extent of the review itself, given
the weight of the document and the extent to which it changes the very routes of
all public transport of buses in our city, we as a Council need to move now to
provide an answer to the State Government on our position in respect of that
review.
We need to move now on an urgent basis to go back to them to provide them
with a very clear message of what our position is in respect of that, not only
from Councillors on our side of the Chamber but the ALP as well—
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman:
Order!
Councillor MATIC:
—who are groaning and moaning opposite, who are groaning and moaning
opposite, who obviously are not committed to making—
Councillor FLESSER:
Point of order, Madam Acting Chair.
Acting Chairman:
Order!
Councillor FLESSER:
Point of order, Madam Acting Chair.
Acting Chairman:
Point of order, Councillor FLESSER.
Councillor FLESSER:
Madam Acting Chair, we haven't heard what the motion is that Councillor
MATIC is actually moving. If it is urgent, I think that Council should be aware
of what the motion is.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor FLESSER, Councillor MATIC made it quite clear that it was in
respect of the State Government review of the bus routes. Councillor MATIC,
please continue.
Councillor MATIC:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman. We need to provide an answer to the
State Government now, at this integral stage of the consultation progress, setting
out our position quite clearly as a Council, stating our position on behalf of
Brisbane residents. We cannot waste any further time because the consultation
period is limited, and we need to get out there; and this, Madam Acting
Chairman, being the first meeting after the announcement, is the perfect
opportunity for us to go back to the State and start having our voice heard as the
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
-3largest provider of buses in South East Queensland and make sure that our
position is made clear and that we are representing the interests of all Brisbane
residents.
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman:
Order! Councillor MATIC has put forward a motion for urgency.
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman:
I will now put the motion.
The Chairman submitted the motion for the suspension of the Rules of Procedure to the Chamber and it was
declared carried on the voices.
Motion moved:
Acting Chairman:
Councillor MATIC, would you please put forward your motion and if you have
a copy in writing, could you please provide it for the Clerk.
Councillor MATIC:
Madam Acting Chairman, thank you very much. I move the following motion,
and also reserve my right to speak during the course of the debate.
503/2012-13
It was moved by Councillor Peter MATIC, seconded by the Leader of the Opposition, Councillor Milton DICK,
that:
This Council notes the recent review of bus services by the State Government and the significant
financial contribution made by this Council to the public transport network. Council also notes that
public transport passengers were slugged with fare increases by the former Labor State Government,
which had set a 15 per cent price path annually until 2014.
Further, this Council notes that during the times when Brisbane City Council had control of Brisbane
bus fares and services, regular reviews of routes and timetables occurred.
Council notes and supports the government’s decision to halve the fare increase in 2013. However, in
order to secure future growth on public transport, this Council calls on the State Government to
immediately reconsider the proposed route changes that will have a significant impact on Brisbane
residents, in particular, seniors, the infirm and those with mobility issues.
Council further urges the State Government to desist from any cuts to peak hour services that will lead
to significant overcrowding on key routes and has the potential to increase private car use and traffic
congestion.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor MATIC, you said you reserved your right to speak further in the
debate. LORD MAYOR.
LORD MAYOR:
Yes, thanks very much, Madam Acting Chair. I rise to enter the debate in
relation to the motion that has been moved—
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Point of order, Madam Acting Chairman.
Acting Chairman:
Point of order, LORD MAYOR.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
In line with the—
Acting Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON, can you please wait to be called. Councillor
JOHNSTON, your point of order.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
In line with the Rules of Procedure, debate usually goes from one side to the
other. As Councillor MATIC has just spoken, I believe there should be a speaker
from the other side.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON, if you are aware of the appropriate rules, the rules are
that the person that puts the motion has the option to speak first. In this case, the
LORD MAYOR has taken Councillor MATIC's right for that option, so it is on
this side of the Chamber. He has not spoken, so it does not go from side to side
until such time as debate has commenced. LORD MAYOR.
LORD MAYOR:
Thanks very much, Madam Acting Chairman. Councillors with me preferred
that Councillor MATIC reserves his right.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
-4The fact of the matter is that we have seen a former State Government that had a
15 per cent fare growth hike each year through to 2014. I am on the public
record, loud and clear, as saying that fare increases of 15 per cent a year are
simply not sustainable. I want to commence by thanking the State Government
for acknowledging that sort of fare increase is not sustainable. They
acknowledged it this year in the budget by halving that amount. I note the
Minister's comments that he is keen to seek increases that will be far less than
that in the future.
It is also, I think, fair and reasonable to say that a review was needed in the
region. There were services that had far too few people on them. Reviews are
not new. Reviews are something which have been happening over the years. It is
the case that when this Council had responsibility for buses, for bus fares, for
bus services, up to integrated ticketing taking over in 2004, we saw a number of
reviews being undertaken. I make reference to a couple of articles from that
time. ‘Lord Mayor Jim Soorley said it was common sense to review services
that were not being used and the introduction of electronic ticketing had made it
easier for Council to identify underperforming routes.’ That was in July 2000.
I note from the Southern Star of August 2000, and again I quote from the article,
‘Bus services averaging up to 14 passengers a trip are among those to be axed in
southside suburbs including Wishart, Runcorn, and Mount Gravatt according to
an internal document. This comes despite Brisbane City Council Transport
Chairman Maureen Hayes informing the Southern Star on Friday morning that
Council was only cutting services averaging five or fewer passengers.’
So, Madam Acting Chairman, it is important today, when we hear from the
Labor Party, that we understand the context of history. The bus reviews are not
new. Bus reviews have been happening for a very, very long time. This is the
third phase of public consultation that the State Government have put out. We,
as I mentioned in Question Time, I think it was last week, indicated that we as
councillors on this side have individually put in submissions to the State
Government around the bus review on individual routes, around individual
aspects of that review.
But now they have put out what is a very substantial document. It is a document
which has taken some time to examine and review the implications of. So it is,
having reviewed that document, I think it is fair to say that there are winners and
there are losers. Nothing new in that in terms of bus reviews. But there are
indeed, in this review in my view, aspects of it which I would describe as a leap
of faith.
BUZ (Bus Upgrade Zones) and other high frequency networks are being
downgraded—no question about that—being downgraded from a much longer
period of day to a 7am to 7pm timeframe in terms of the very high frequency
services. The City Express concept will cease to exist. One of the things that I
am particularly concerned about in the review is the fundamental aspect of the
society in which we live today is a convenient society. Many trips as a result of
the review will be longer; many others will involve transfers, either transfers bus
to bus, bus to rail. Transfers, again, are not new, but it is the degree to which
they occur.
There are many students of public transport, many operators of transport
systems who very much support intermodal and, indeed, transfers between the
same mode as part of public transport journeys. I don't. I happen to hold the
view that, if you make it too hard for people, they simply jump back into cars. I
have been working very, very hard in this place and this Administration has
been working very hard now over a number of years to grow the public transport
service.
I quote numbers in this Chamber quite regularly. Between 1991 and 2004,
public transport grew from 44 million to 48 million passengers, just 8 per cent
growth over a period of 13 years, while population in this city grew by 20 per
cent. Since that time we have seen some very strong growth. The reality is that
since 2004, we have seen a 66 per cent growth in the patronage on Brisbane
Transport buses.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
-5Councillor interjecting:
Acting Chairman:
Order!
LORD MAYOR:
That is one of the strongest growths you will find around the world. The reality
is that we are in a very, very strong position.
In relation to super stops, I think the jury is well and truly out in terms of how
they might work, how they might function, in terms of the pedestrian capacity in
our CBD streets around these things. I am not coming out today and completely
condemning them, but I just say that I have some doubts, and I will want to
examine in a lot more detail how those super stops will work, how we might
manage the capacities around those. I understand the theory behind them. What
I want to work out is how they might operate in practice. I simply say that there
is a need to do a lot more work around that before I will be convinced.
This Council, as an entity, invests a lot of money in public transport. Our total
spend each year around public transport equates to around $500 million. It is a
big slug of our budget, and certainly we get a sizeable proportion back from the
State Government. But, as an entity, we also invest upfront a lot of money. We
invest over $70 million alone in what we see as a community service obligation.
That is a commitment that we make, that we put on the table, to ensure that our
city has a strong bus service. I hope that, as part of this review, that will be
remembered, and that will be acknowledged, and that will be reflected in the
outcome of this review.
I note that there is a period of time for public feedback. We will continue to give
that feedback to the government. I just say that, as I have with the draft new City
Plan—where I have been out very publicly inviting people to have a good look
at it and participate in it and give feedback on it—so, too, I say today that people
of this city ought to be having a good look at how it impacts on them
individually, how it affects them, and make their own judgment and draw their
own conclusions about this review.
Acting Chairman:
Further debate; Councillor DICK.
Councillor DICK:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chair, and I rise to strongly support today's motion. I
do so acknowledging that it has taken the LORD MAYOR to speak five days
from when this review was first released. We have not heard a word from the
LORD MAYOR of this city five days from when that review came down,
because he 'needed time to look at it.' Well, I can tell you that people of
Brisbane have had time to look at it. The people across our city, the commuters,
the mums and dads, the elderly, the frail, the young, the shift workers, have all
looked at the review and have rejected it.
It took a notice of motion by the Labor Councillors, lodged on Thursday
afternoon, the very day the review came down, to drag this Administration and
this Council, to shame them into finally taking some action. Well, like
everything that this Council does, it is always too little too late, because, you
know what: the time for action was before the review came down, before that
joke of a minister, Scott Emerson, released this fraudulent document, a shameful
document for the public transport users of our city.
He is too busy lodging media releases attacking me for standing up for my local
community, as he did last Monday, where he attacked me saying that I did not
care about public transport because I was decrying the cutbacks to the southwest
of Brisbane. Well, I have got a very clear message to Scott Emerson: you need
to front the people of Brisbane, get out of your tax-funded paid limousine and
start answering the tough questions.
Madam Acting Chair, it is too little too late from this Council. We have said for
weeks for the LORD MAYOR to release his own documents about this review.
What did he write to the State Government? What did he tell the State
Government about what he wanted out of this review? He is hiding those
documents and refusing to release that information.
I acknowledge the former Labor Government got it wrong when it came to fare
increases. I acknowledge, as I did last year, as I did when those fare increases
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
-6came in. I know that the public transport system in our city is under pressure,
and the best way we can do that is not to cut services, is not to rip the funding
out of it. We know all along that the State Government has had a plan, as a
result of the Costello audit, to fatten up the public transport sector so they can
sell it, so that they can ship it out to market. We know from day one that there
was an announcement of $20 million they wanted to rip out of public transport
in our city.
It has taken this LORD MAYOR five days to break his silence, but that is okay.
I will forgive him for that. What I want to know is: what action has he taken?
Don't walk into this Council five days later, after I put a notice of motion on the
paper. Has he picked up the phone to Campbell Newman? Has he demanded a
meeting with the Transport Minister? I can tell you what I have done. I have
issued three media statements. I have done interviews. I have written to the
Transport Minister. I have written to the CEO of TransLink denouncing this
shambolic consultation period.
I challenge the LORD MAYOR in today's debate to release all the
correspondence that he has done. Instead, we get a motion, a tired motion that
we walk into this Council Chamber five days after the initial announcement
came through. But let's go through in detail why and how this will impact the
commuters of Brisbane.
First of all, just looking in my own local area, where we have seen a dozen cuts
to services, key bus routes including the 101, the 102, the 103, the 110, the 122,
the 465, the 460, the 462, the 465, the 466, the 467, the 468 and the P461—just
in my ward alone. There are 111 services that this State Government is ripping
out from commuters across the city, and what has this Council said about it?
Nothing, until today. They have been dragged kicking and screaming.
The Chair of Public Transport in this city has refused to speak about this matter.
In my office we have a whole series of timetables sitting in the front of my
office. Well, this is no longer required in our city. These timetables are now
redundant because this State Government shows contempt for the commuters in
our city. It is no secret for 30 years the people of Inala were denied public
transport and bus services in Inala. It took the election of a State Labor
Government. For years this LORD MAYOR sat around the Cabinet table when
the Liberals controlled Public Transport in this city and denied the people of
Inala a bus service.
It took the election of Jim Soorley until the buses finally rolled into Inala. Well,
I can tell you, at the bus stops on Friday afternoon, at the mobile office I
conducted on Saturday morning, where literally hundreds and hundreds of
people signed the petition that I had circulating at the Inala Civic Centre. They
said one clear message: this is a rolling back of a crop. This is what the LNP do.
This is what conservative governments do when they get into power. They sack
people. They cut services and they rip out public transport to some of the most
needy and vulnerable in our community.
Well, Madam Acting Chair, through you to the LORD MAYOR, I say enough is
enough. I want more from this Council, and I want more from this LORD
MAYOR. Will he join me at rallies, at public meetings? Will he come to the
steps of Parliament House and denounce what the Transport Minister has said?
Will he circulate to ratepayers his strong views, or will he simply sit back as he
has done for the last six months while this review was rolled out, and at five
minutes to midnight, after the review was put on the table, turn around and say,
oh gee, I don't think it is good enough.
Well, time is up. It is time to take action, and this LNP Council has been found
wanting when it comes to the public transport cuts. The LORD MAYOR talked
about BUZ (Bus Upgrade Zone) routes. I can talk about one BUZ route in
particular, the 100, the key shuttle route between Forest Lake, Inala, through
your ward, Madam Acting Chair, right throughout the community, along
Blunder Road, to the PA (Princess Alexandria Hospital). What does this
government suggest to those people? They are reducing—and I quote—'It will
be no longer as part of the frequent network service.'
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
-7So, Labor State Government, under State Transport Minister Annastacia
Palaszczuk, pours millions of dollars into turning that into a BUZ route service
just two years ago. LNP in power rips it out, leaving people behind at the bus
stops. It is disgraceful. What we have seen time and time again, the LNP is not
interested in public servants, and they are not interested in public transport as
well.
When you look at the review, when the TransLink website, as residents told me
yesterday, is continually crashing, because you can only give feedback through
the internet, so for those users who do not have access, for those older, elderly
people who do not have access to the internet, their voices will not be heard.
Well, on this side of the Chamber, Labor Councillors will ensure that they are
given a fair go, that they are given a voice.
When you look at the services that have been cut, particularly in my own ward,
it will now mean residents in the Inala district and surrounding areas will not
have a direct service to QE2 Hospital. It will now mean that they will have to
catch multiple buses just to seek medical appointments. If those opposite are
truly, truly indignant about these cutbacks, well, put your money where your
mouth is, launch a campaign, go out into the media and condemn these cuts. Do
not simply say we note with concern. Get up here—and we know that the LNP
Councillors have already broken ranks, because Councillor WINES, the
Councillor for Enoggera—
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman;
Order!
Councillor DICK:
—is saying that this is a great review. Well, I say it is a shameful review, and
the commuters of Brisbane know that. The commuters of Brisbane—in five
years since I have been the Councillor for Richlands, there has not been one
single other issue that I have seen so much community anger about. Around
1000 residents since Thursday have contacted my office by phone, email, fax, to
advise me that they are scared. They are scared about losing services, and the
people of Inala and low income areas are being hardest hit by these changes.
It is not good enough for this Council to simply waltz in with a motion. They
should be going out on the streets condemning this for what it is, a sham when it
comes to consultation; a disgrace when it comes to future public transport in our
area, and I can guarantee the people of Brisbane: we will keep fighting for them.
We will give them a voice, and we will make sure that the State Government
backs down on these cruel and unfair changes.
Acting Chairman:
Further debate; Councillor MATIC.
Councillor MATIC:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman. Listening to Councillor DICK, I just
think he might have got the motion confused. I am sure it said this Council
notes, but all I heard from Councillor DICK was Councillor DICK, all talking
about himself, the impacts on him, what he has supposedly done throughout this
whole period. He has been silent.
Councillor interjecting:
Acting Chairman:
Councillor FLESSER!
Councillor MATIC:
Where has Councillor DICK been throughout this whole period? Where was
Councillor DICK when he raised the questions in this Chamber? He says the
LORD MAYOR has not spoken on this issue before, that the LORD MAYOR
has not been heard before on this issue, which is a complete fabrication. He
continues to mislead the Chamber as it suits him on these issues.
Quite clearly the LORD MAYOR has spoken on this issue on 7 August,
11 September last year, and 12 February this year—three separate occasions
throughout, when the review was announced, throughout the review period, and
even recently, and today. This LORD MAYOR has been on the ball and
addressing the issues of this review from when it was announced. But where has
the ALP been? Nowhere to be seen.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
-8Councillor DICK wants to get out there and talk about himself. Councillor
DICK wants to talk about all the things that he has done, when in reality he has
done nothing but play the politics. Where are the ALP when it comes to these
issues? Where were they outside making submissions? Did all of their
Councillors make submissions when they needed to in respect of the issue? Did
they? No, Madam Acting Chairman, they did not.
When they had the opportunity for public consultation on the document, did
they all make submissions? The answer is no. They make a submission when it
suits them. This side of the Chamber is getting on with the job of dealing with
this issue. This side of the Chamber understands the seriousness of what we are
going through and the importance that we come forward and present our
opinions to the State Government now.
Hence the sense of urgency; hence this debate right now. Nothing to do with the
ALP. They, on the other hand, are playing catch-up, as they always do, with no
policies, no position and no idea of where they are going.
The State Government has made this announcement in respect of the review. A
review is required. We saw 15 per cent increases from the previous ALP
Government in respect of fares on the TransLink services. That hurts residents
in the hip pocket. There needed to be a review in order to try and find the
savings to give people cheaper options on their travel. Where was the ALP when
the Bligh Government was introducing 15 per cent increases? It was going to
put on another 15 per cent in January and another one, so two more increases of
15 per cent. If they had been able to do it, they would have seen an increase in
fares of 60 per cent. Where do the ratepayers of Brisbane find the extra money
to deal with those issues?
So, Madam Acting Chairman, let us not get it wrong. Those opposite have
totally missed the point. This is a review to look at the efficiencies and to
provide savings back to Brisbane residents, and for that the government should
be applauded. What they have done, in being able to do that, as in their stated
objectives, to remove service duplication, manage infrastructure capacity,
simplify the network with an aim to encourage more people to use public
transport, improve connectivity, and redirect resources to where there are
overcrowded services as a result of patronage declines linked to fare increases.
That was the intent.
If you listen to Councillor DICK, it is all doom and gloom as far as where he is
from, because it is all about him and his ward. But when he was State Director
of the ALP, where was he on fares then? Where was he pushing the policies of
more efficiency and cheaper fares for all of Queensland? Nowhere to be seen.
Yet he comes into this Chamber and criticises this side of the Chamber on
making those progressive movements towards providing the feedback for not
only efficiency but a better connected service for all Brisbane residents. That is
what this side of the Chamber is doing.
Councillor DICK acts like there has never been a bus review before.
Councillors interjecting
Councillor MATIC:
Yet Councillor DICK acknowledges Councillor Soorley—
Acting Chairman:
Just a moment, please, Councillor MATIC. There is too much audible noise
coming from the Opposition side of the Chamber. It is to cease. Thank you.
Councillor MATIC.
Councillor MATIC:
Councillor DICK refuses to accept the past. He acknowledged Councillor
Soorley, yet does not attribute to him reviews of the previous network when it
was under the control of Brisbane City Council, and the cuts of services that he
instituted in 1995, under The Courier-Mail article, “'Lord Mayor Jim Soorley
has foreshadowed cuts to Brisbane's bus services as a result of a far-reaching
$1 million review of the city's public transport system. Councillor Soorley
would not guarantee there would be no net decreases in service as a result of the
review. 'There will be cuts to the service. I do not say there will not be cuts to
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
-9service', he said. 'If 100 bus routes are not productive, we may transfer them to
another 80 routes somewhere else.'”
The LORD MAYOR also quoted from the Southern Star in November 2001: 'At
least 50 bus services in Holland Park, Wishart, Runcorn, Moorooka and
Chandler have been axed in recent years, some of them express services that
carried people home from the CBD during peak hours.' So, let's not have the
ALP come in here and say that this has not been done before by their own party
in this Council Chamber when they were in control.
What we are here to debate is the essence of the review, to look at those routes
and see how they impact on Brisbane residents. There has been a three-tiered
approach to this review by the State Government.
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman:
Order!
Councillor MATIC:
On the first tier, it is about removing the BUZ network and introducing
26 frequent routes from 7am to 7pm with seven-minute timeframes in between
each stop. Under that is a secondary service, reaching out to the suburbs,
providing connectivity within those suburbs back to those major shopping
centres, and then providing residents the opportunity to go on from that
secondary service to the primary service, to the high frequency service. Also
there is a third tier which is in respect of the rocket services and rejigging those
as well.
So, what we see from our perspective is a number of those routes that we
previously knew well now being evolved to another stage where routes have
been combined, some have been cut, and the frequency of many of them
changed. We can see quite clearly that, of the 230 routes that we have within
BCC, a significant number of changes that are occurring within those. What we
need to do productively as a Council is move forward in our feedback to the
State Government, providing them the feedback they need as to what those cuts
will prove to be for Brisbane residents.
The key to the whole process for the review is this issue of interchange, of
moving from route to route, from a start to a finish, rather moving towards the
ability to catch a bus from one section, then stop at a super stop or an
interchange area and then catch another bus which will then take you
specifically into the CBD. Will this system work? As the LORD MAYOR says,
this is something that is particularly challenging for Brisbane residents. It is
something that we haven't seen before. So this is something that the government
has to provide further detail on, and also provide further information as to how it
is going to work.
We know on this side of the Chamber that we have had a traditional system of
one route from start to finish. How this is going to impact on residents we think
will be challenging, particularly challenging. What we need to do is go back to
the State, to look at those routes that they have noted, and say, on this particular
route, this needs to be changed; on this particular route, this bit here needs to be
amended. Because there are significant changes throughout the whole network.
What we need to do is go through it collectively, looking at each one of those.
What we have seen through our investment in the network, as the LORD
MAYOR said, is a 66 per cent increase in our patronage numbers. That comes
only through the record amount of investment that this side of the Chamber has
put into public transport. It is quite clearly not only from the Minister's press
releases and his speeches in the media that Brisbane Transport is performing
well. We are averaging 26 patrons per trip, which is greater than the rest of SEQ
(South East Queensland), but we have seen through the review itself a
consolidation of all those figures. That is where the figure comes from of lesser
patronage.
What we will be doing is providing that feedback to the Minister, and to
TransLink, to show that our services are working well and that we are the ones
carrying the peak loads. We, out of all the other councils, are carrying far more
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 10 numbers and more efficiently. Importantly, this Council is carrying more
passengers than even the South East Queensland QR (Queensland Railways)
service is.
What we see from this side of the Chamber, through our record investment,
through our contribution and our commitment to public transport, is what we
don't see on those opposite. In the 10 years prior to 2004, the ALP only saw
0.9 per cent increase in their patronage increases. Why? Because they failed to
value public transport. They failed to invest in public transport as this side of the
Chamber has. We have a strong record in this place, and we will continue to do
that. We have a voice which we will send to George Street and make it known
as to what we are doing—
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman:
Order!
Councillor MATIC:
—and how we are looking after the interests of Brisbane residents moving
forwards.
Acting Chairman:
Thank you, Councillor MATIC; Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Thank you, Madam Deputy Chairman. Let's get some facts into this debate.
Twenty five per cent of bus services offered in this city are to be cut or reduced
by the Newman State Government. These changes will have a massive impact
on the residents of our city. They are going to particularly hurt the elderly and
they are going to hurt school students, and they are going to hurt those people
who rely on public transport because they do not have any other option. These
are the people who will be worse off and worse affected by these cuts. It is
shocking, the extent of the cuts of services.
Today in the paper, my State member—and I am embarrassed to say this man's
my State member—my State member is in there saying, oh, we have to do this
because bus fares are going up. The elderly have been priced out of public
transport. Well, they have not been priced out of public transport. Scott Emerson
has shut them out of public transport in this city. It is Scott Emerson with his
fingerprints all over this review that has shut out the residents of this city from
public transport services.
We have just heard the LORD MAYOR and Councillor MATIC stand up and
say this is all about efficiency, this is about better connectedness, justifying why
the State Government are going about cutting 25 per cent of this city's bus
services; not 10 per cent, not 5 per cent—25 per cent of this city's bus services.
Here is where the deception of Councillor MATIC is just pointed out so clearly.
He has told us that this is about efficiency. Well, Madam Acting Chairman, this
Council has said that is not the case. His own Council officers have stood up and
said that is not right. Here is what the Council officers wrote to the State
Government towards the end of last year as part of this review: 'TransLink has
proposed major changes to many of these routes. That is, the TransLink
proposals are not simply targeting underperforming services, but they are
proposing major changes to well-performing services some of which are among
our highest patronage services in the network.'
Well, LORD MAYOR, Councillor MATIC, stand up and say why you think
those cuts are okay, because I don't think they are okay. I know in my area we
are losing the following bus services. I am going to have one bus service left in
my ward. The 104, the 105, the 107, the 108, the 116, the 106, 598, 599, and the
frequency to the 100 has been cut. The only one that is being kept, and it is
being replaced, is the 121. Right across the ward, residents will be left without
bus services at all—at all. We've got whole suburbs in my ward that will not
have a single bus service—Rocklea, Tennyson. It is shocking, the extent of the
cuts that are affecting the south-western suburbs. Kids will not be able to get to
school. They come across from the south-western suburbs to come into South
Brisbane to go to school. They will not be able to do that anymore. The elderly
come across to the two major hospitals that service the south side, the PA
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 11 (Princess Alexandra hospital) and the Mater. There is not a single bus service
going that way now. They have been cut. It is shocking, the extent of these cuts.
Not only that; this Council knows full well and good that this State Government
has targeted services that are performing and exceeding expectations. I am going
to give a local example, the 107. This is a bus service that services a major
retirement village in my ward in Yeronga. The State Government's own findings
demonstrate that it is exceeding its minimum requirements. It is more than
70 per cent cost efficient. It averages 26 people on each run. It is being cut, for
God's sake. It is being cut. I cannot understand why that bus service is being cut.
It is raising money; it certainly has got a high patronage. Eight is the benchmark,
apparently, according to the Minister. This service has got 26. That is one
example in my ward.
The residents of that retirement village will have to walk approximately a
kilometre to get to a bus. Does anybody know an elderly or infirm person who
can walk that far? Or, as the brilliant member for Indooroopilly says, hop on a
train. Well, that is okay for the member for Indooroopilly who runs in the gym
and out on the road, but if you are elderly, you can't get up the stairs at most
train stations in this city. It is outrageous. We don't have universal access.
How is an elderly person supposed to get up the 110 stairs at Yeronga to get on
to a train? They can't. How are they supposed to do it at Sherwood or Graceville
or Chelmer? They can't do it. That is why they rely on the buses. That is why we
have made an investment, as a Council, in low-floor buses, in disability bus
stops. Millions and millions of dollars that we have invested as a Council into
our bus services and public transport have just been flushed down the toilet by
the Newman State Government. It is a disgrace. This LORD MAYOR and this
Premier stood side by side a year ago and said, yes, it is going to be good for
this city. It is going to be good for this city to have both of us in charge. Well, I
don't think so, not what we're seeing, and I can tell you now cutting these bus
services is going to hurt.
There are some media sitting here today. The first time we have had TV cameras
in here for a while, and our State paper is here too. Let me say this: the Premier
of this State publishes his diary on line; so does the Minister for Transport.
Acting Chairman:
To the motion, Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Have a look—have a look at who has been going to see them. Has Councillor
MATIC been in to see them to lobby on behalf of this city? Has the LORD
MAYOR been in to lobby them on behalf of this city? No, they have not. The
first six months of the Newman State Government, the LORD MAYOR wasn't
down there to have an official meeting with the Premier at all—at all. At least
Newman used to go toddling up the hill with the former Premier Beattie. This
LORD MAYOR just lets him do what he wants. This is outrageous.
For months and months in the Public and Active Transport Committee, I have
been asking Councillor MATIC what is happening with the review, what is
going on? Even this morning, he could not bring himself to allow a debate. Do
you know what we debated in Public and Active Transport this morning?
Acting Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON—
Councillor JOHNSTON:
The history of ferries and CityCats.
Acting Chairman:
—Councillor JOHNSTON!
Councillor JOHNSTON:
I am so angry about it.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON, do not speak over me. The matters of the Public and
Active Transport Committee meeting this morning are not part of this motion.
Bring yourself back to the motion or I will sit you down.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Thank you so much, Madam Acting Chairman, for making my point. This
morning the chairman of this committee could not be bothered to have a
discussion about this matter. Clearly he has gone back to the LORD MAYOR's
office to report back on what happened and they have gone, oh, we had better do
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 12 something. So someone has had a look at the review, and oh, it's not real good,
maybe we should put a motion up.
Well, they're a bit slow and a bit late. Let's be clear, Madam Acting Chairman,
and I am flagging I have an amendment here. It is a very minor one. But I note
even the weasel words in this submission, and that is, we are only asking the
State Government to desist from peak hour cuts. That is not good enough as far
as I am concerned.
MOTION FOR AMENDMENT:
504/2012-13
It was moved by Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON, seconded by Councillor Kim FLESSER that the motion be
amended in the first line of the fourth paragraph by the deletion of the words ‘peak hour’.
Acting Chairman:
To the amendment, Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Yes, Madam Acting Chairman. What you could possibly consider the action
paragraph of the motion put forward by the LNP actually says that Council
further urges the State Government to desist from any cuts to peak hour
services. Those are weasel words. This Council should be asking for this State
Government to desist from any cuts to bus services, not just peak hour services.
The reason this is so important is because it is the elderly who particularly use
non-peak bus services, going to the hospitals, going to see their doctors, going to
the optometrist, doing their shopping. The elderly stay off peak services because
they know they are the commuter services that are full.
I do not think our elderly should be disadvantaged by the weasel words of this
Council, this LORD MAYOR, this Chairman of Public and Active Transport,
who goes, oh, it's okay to cut all the services that are non-peak, but don't cut the
peak ones. That is not good enough in my view. This Council should be saying,
hands off our bus services, Mr Newman, hands off. We are not going to shut our
residents out of public transport services, and we are not going to shut them out
of those they need during the day to get to their doctors. It is outrageous, Madam
Acting Chairman. We all know that it is the elderly who will be most affected
by this, and school students in the afternoon who can't get home from school.
I urge all Councillors to agree to take out these words. It would be a sensible
amendment, and I would certainly hope, if they are going to vote it down, they
at least have the guts to stand up and say why they don’t think it's a good idea,
not like they do in other cases where they don't even speak to amendments.
We also know that the Council officers had concerns about this issue as well.
Again, Councillor MATIC is out of step with the advice of the Council officers.
I say this: this is from the Council officer who is handling the bus review for
Council. 'At the moment, in many cases, community services appear to be
assessed with the same framework as commuter services.' Well, that is it,
Madam Acting Chairman. They are being considered on the same basis, and as a
result, there will be disproportionate effects on the elderly and on school
students. It is not good enough.
This Council should send a clear message down the end of George Street, and
the message it should send is: we don't agree to any cuts to our bus services,
particularly those like the 107 which are essentially non-peak services which are
performing above minimum expectations, which are efficient with their cost
recovery, which have good patronage numbers on them, 26 per bus service.
There is no reason for that service to be cut, other than this State Government is
trying to find or save some money. Well, Madam Acting Chairman, I certainly
do not believe, I do not believe for one second Councillor MATIC's
protestations that it is okay because we are going to get it back in savings to our
public transport costs. We are going to get it back in savings.
I can tell you this: my community has heard it all before. When the Sherwood
Bus Depot got built, we were all told, yes, you will get better bus services. Let
me tell you I have been inundated with emails over the last few weeks: what has
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 13 happened to our better bus services? They are gone. That bus depot will now
have its most frequent routes: Sorry, not in service. If you live in Sherwood or in
Graceville, you won't be able to get on a bus, and if you are elderly, you will
struggle to get up the stairs.
Let's send a clear message to George Street. Let's make sure that it's not just
peak hour services we are protecting. Let's make sure, like we say in our vision
statement as a Council, that we believe in an inclusive community, that we are
going to make sure that public services, community services, are there for the
elderly and for school students. Let's make sure that all bus services are
protected, not just the ones that we think are peak hour services. I ask all
Councillors to support this amendment.
Acting Chairman:
Further debate on the amendment; Councillor FLESSER.
Councillor FLESSER:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chair. Yes, I do support this amendment. These are
weasel words that have been put into this motion by the LORD MAYOR, to
only cut peak hour services. The services that are being proposed to be cut
across Brisbane go well beyond just concerns about peak hour. I will speak
specifically about schools, because the bus services to schools, from my
understanding across Brisbane, are going to have serious implications for school
children and their parents. It is going to get more cars on the roads. It is going to
cause more traffic congestion around schools.
I know for a fact that services have been cut for Craigslea State School,
Earnshaw State College, and in my ward, St Pius School at Banyo. This Council
has got an Active School program at the moment running at St Pius School
where we are trying to get students on to buses. What are we doing? What is the
State Government doing? Cutting the 306 bus service around Banyo which will
reduce the opportunity for students to catch the bus to St Pius School.
The LNP have got privatisation in their genes. They believe that if a public
service is not making a profit, they cut it, and if a public service does run at a
profit, do you know what they do? They sell it. This motion needs to be a strong,
firm motion to the State Government telling them that we need decent proper
bus services in our suburbs, not just at peak hour but across the daily timetable.
Of course, as the motion mentions, there are concerns about senior and the
infirm and those with mobility issues. Those people are not always the ones that
travel in peak hour. But the original motion said we are just going to be
concerned about peak hour cuts. This Council has an opportunity to be strong
against the State Government. I am concerned that this motion is not strong
enough, and that is why I support the amendment.
My ward has seen cuts to the 306, 307 and 322 bus services. They are seriously
going to affect the Australian Catholic University at Banyo. This is the largest
problem area in my ward as far as parking and traffic issues are concerned,
probably behind Nundah. The streets are being parked out; there is not enough
bus services. The 306 and 307 both service the Australian Catholic University,
and the proposal that has been put forward by the State Government sees no bus
services to the Australian Catholic University. This is not a peak hour service.
This is a service that is required for a university that already has huge parking
problems. So, to reduce the bus services going to that university are going to
make those problems even worse.
Let's look at the whole suburb of Nudgee Beach. The whole suburb of Nudgee
Beach, that is not peak hour. It is only a couple of services a day, but completely
cut. The whole suburb of Nudgee Beach is going to lose all public transport
options. The nearest public transport that residents at Nudgee Beach can access
will be a five-kilometre walk, a five-kilometre walk. Can you imagine school
children or the infirm or elderly walking five kilometres to catch either a bus or
a train?
I support this amendment. We should be making sure that it is not just peak hour
that we are concerned about. We should be looking at making sure the State
Government don't cut services right across the week day and weekends where
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 14 they are absolutely necessary out in the suburbs, in particular, for those seniors,
for the infirm, the elderly and for school children.
Acting Chairman:
Further debate; Councillor JOHNSTON, to the amendment.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Well, Madam Acting Chairman, we have just seen it. We have just seen it. I had
my crystal ball out. No one from the LNP has the guts to stand up and speak
against the motion. Perhaps I will say this: perhaps I am guessing the wrong
way. Maybe they are going to support this amendment as it has been put. Maybe
they feel that they could have worded it a little bit differently, and maybe they
will say yes, we are prepared to protect any bus service, regardless of peak or
non-peak.
But I suspect that is not the case. I think they are just going to vote it down
without even bothering to have the guts to speak to it, without even bothering to
say why they are only protecting peak hour services. Because that will be the
impact of voting down this amendment, that this Council says it will only
support peak hour services. Why would they do that? Why would they say, yes,
it's okay; we want to keep our peak hour services for commuters, but if it's a
non-peak service, too bad, so sad, we're not going to do anything to help you
with the Newman State Government.
Do you think they hopped up to tell us why? No, they did not. No, they did not.
I have to day, I did tweet out the other day, having read the Costello report, and
yes, having worked for the Howard Government for many years, I am certainly
aware that privatisation can sometimes be a good thing. But I have tweeted out
and emailed out and put out to the media in the last few weeks: why don't you
rule out privatisation to the Newman Government. Have we heard them rule it
out? No, we haven't.
Now we see this Council only prepared to go into bat to support peak hour
services for residents of this city. They are not prepared to go into bat to support
non-peak services for the elderly and for our school students. We know these
cuts will hit them disproportionately, but we now know that this LORD
MAYOR does not have the guts to stand up and support all bus services in this
city.
Remember, 25 per cent of all bus services in this city are about to be cut or
reduced. We know from the Council officers that TransLink is targeting services
that are profitable and those that have good patronage levels. They are not just
targeting those with low patronage and high costs, as Councillor MATIC said.
We have got that in writing here from the officers. So what is the agenda? Why
are we being told one thing there and another here? Well, Madam Acting
Chairman, this was a simple motion. This just said, as a Council, we will tell the
State Government that we support saving all bus services, and the people
opposite didn't even have the guts to speak to it. Shame on them.
Acting Chairman:
I will now put the amendment.
Amendment put
Upon being submitted to the meeting the motion for the amendment was declared lost on the voices.
Thereupon, Councillors JOHNSTON and GRIFFITHS immediately rose and called for a division, which
resulted in the amendment being declared lost.
The voting was as follows:
AYES: 7 -
The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Milton DICK, and Councillors
Helen ABRAHAMS, Peter CUMMING, Kim FLESSER, Steve GRIFFITHS,
Victoria NEWTON, and Nicole JOHNSTON.
NOES: 18 -
The Right Honourable the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK,
DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista
ADAMS,
Matthew BOURKE,
Amanda
COOPER,
Vicki
HOWARD,
Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Geraldine KNAPP, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC,
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 15 Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN-TAYLOR,
Julian SIMMONDS, Andrew WINES, and Norm WYNDHAM.
Debate on substantive motion continued
Acting Chairman:
I will now return to the substantive motion; DEPUTY MAYOR.
DEPUTY MAYOR:
Madam Acting Chairman, thank you. In relation to the amendment we just
heard, it was quite clear that the Councillor and the Councillors opposite did not
read the motion that is in front of them. Let me make it very clear what this
motion says.
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman:
Order!
DEPUTY MAYOR:
This Council calls on the State Government to immediately reconsider the
proposed route changes that will have a significant impact on Brisbane
residents, in particular, seniors, the infirm and those with mobility issues. That
statement covers exactly what was talked about just then, and I suggest that
before wasting the Council's time that Councillor JOHNSTON should actually
read the motion.
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman:
Order!
DEPUTY MAYOR:
Speaking generally to this motion, I would say that it is very important for
TransLink and the State Government to acknowledge that Brisbane City Council
is a major investor and a major stakeholder in public transport in South-East
Queensland. Not only do we put tens of millions of dollars each year into the
network; we also carry more passengers than any other component of the public
transport network.
Brisbane City Council buses carry 80 million passengers per year at the
moment. Queensland Rail trains carry 52 million—80 million, Brisbane City
Council, 52 million, Queensland Rail. Other bus operators—so if you get all of
the other bus operators in South-East Queensland and combine them, carry 40
million. So, by far and away, Brisbane City Council carries more passengers,
and we invest more than any other council in South-East Queensland. We have
done that for many years, because we are absolutely committed to seeing
improved public transport services. We have demonstrated year in, year out, and
our record states very clearly.
We have seen a massive growth in patronage under this Administration. Back in
2004, when this Administration was first elected, patronage on our buses was 48
million. Today it is 80 million. If you look at the 13 years of Labor
administration that precede that, you will see that in 13 years they only
increased from 41 million to 48 million.
A councillor interjecting
DEPUTY MAYOR:
Forty-four to 48 million, so a 4 million patronage increase as opposed to—
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Point of order, Madam Acting Chairman.
DEPUTY MAYOR:
—a 32 million—
Acting Chairman:
Point of order against you, DEPUTY MAYOR.
DEPUTY MAYOR:
—patronage increase under this Administration.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Yes, Madam Acting Chairman, patronage is not the issue in the motion that has
been put forward to us today. It is about cuts to the bus service, and I would ask
you to draw the DEPUTY LORD MAYOR back to the issue, which is about the
cuts and changes to the TransLink bus review.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON, as you are aware, and as you have also spoken about
today, the levels of patronage are part of the determination process for
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 16 determining the continuation of certain routes. So DEPUTY MAYOR, please
continue.
DEPUTY MAYOR:
Councillor JOHNSTON is very determined to get me back to the motion, given
that she didn't even read the motion earlier.
Not only do we put more money in, and we have invested more money than any
other council, we also provide value for money in the bus services that are
provided by Brisbane City Council. I firmly believe this. If you look at the
TransLink funding that goes into our public transport network, and you calculate
the dollar per passenger, you will find that Brisbane City Council bus services
offer better than other bus providers and better value than rail services. That is
clearly indicated in the figures.
A councillor interjecting
DEPUTY MAYOR:
If you look at—
Acting Chairman:
Just a moment, please, DEPUTY MAYOR. Councillor JOHNSTON, I have
asked you previously not to continue to call out across this Chamber. If you
continue to do so, it will be considered an act of disorder. DEPUTY MAYOR,
please continue.
DEPUTY MAYOR:
Thank you. If you look, for example, at the TransLink funding for rail
passengers, they are investing more than $15 per passengers that travels on the
rail network. If you look at the TransLink funding for other bus operators, not
Brisbane City Council, they are investing $6 per passenger in city network. If
you look at the investment TransLink puts into the Brisbane bus network, they
are investing $3 per passenger. That means we are doing it more efficiently, and
it means we are providing a great service for the people of Brisbane, and one
that we want to see retained.
There are, as the LORD MAYOR said, some winners and losers in this review.
We have serious concerns about various aspects of this review. We are welcome
to support some of the changes that will deliver positive improvements for parts
of this city, but we are not backwards in coming forward when it comes to
talking about our concerns in relation to other aspects.
I don't know about other Councillors, but I took the opportunity to put in a
submission to TransLink on this bus network review. I would urge all
Councillors to stand up here and tell us what their feedback was and whether
they provided a submission. I know that everyone on this side of the Chamber
did, and I am not sure that everyone on the Labor side did.
Councillor DICK;
Point of order, Madam Acting Chair.
Acting Chairman:
Point of order against you, DEPUTY MAYOR. Councillor DICK.
Councillor DICK:
Will the DEPUTY MAYOR table that correspondence?
DEPUTY MAYOR:
I am happy to table my submission which I have in front of me.
Labor Councillors and Opposition Councillors are great at being outraged. That
is what they do. That is what they have been trained to do by the party machine.
They are great at being outraged. But when it comes to getting results, and
standing up for people, they are found lacking. When it comes to investing in
public transport, when they had the opportunity to do it, they are found lacking.
A councillor interjecting
DEPUTY MAYOR:
In relation to my own submission—
Acting Chairman;
Just a moment, please, DEPUTY MAYOR. Councillor ABRAHAMS, I will
provide you with the same advice I just gave to Councillor JOHNSTON. If you
continue to shout out across this Chamber, it will be considered an act of
disorder. DEPUTY MAYOR.
DEPUTY MAYOR:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman. In relation to my own feedback on this
review, I will go through it quite clearly so everyone is very clear about what I
said. I mentioned up front that we put in more money than any other council,
and that the State should take our investment very seriously. I also pointed out
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 17 that if we did not make that investment, the State investment would have to be
significantly higher in public transport. There is no doubt that that is the case.
I also pointed out that public transport adds significantly to the economic
development and health of our city. I also pointed out that a lack of investment
in public transport ultimately means more cars on the road, and more money that
needs to be spent on road upgrades. So we know that investment in public
transport makes sense. It is good for economic reasons, and it is good for traffic
congestion reduction reasons as well.
In particular, one of the things that I am concerned about, not only as DEPUTY
MAYOR, but also as a local Councillor, is the truncation of certain services. In
particular, the truncation of Redlands services. Redlands is generally provided
by operators such as Veolia and Mount Gravatt Bus Lines. According to page 65
of TransLink's report, one of those routes carries the lion's share of Redlands'
passengers. The report says, on page 65, 'Route 250, which comes from the
Redlands area into the CBD, carries 37 per cent of all Veolia passengers.' The
proposal that we see before us will see all of those passengers being dumped at
Carindale, not to the city as they currently go. All of them will stop at Carindale
and have to change buses. This deeply concerns me as the local Councillor.
I know the pressure on the Carindale interchange at the moment, and I know
there is pressure on other interchanges across the city, such as Indooroopilly,
Chermside—there is a range of interchanges under pressure. To suddenly see
many extra passengers having to get off at an interchange like Carindale and
change buses will have many consequences, and I don't think those
consequences are positive.
For a start, we will see longer trips. So trips that would otherwise continue on
into the city will involve a change in actual bus service. So they will get off the
Redlands bus and on to the Brisbane bus, and that will obviously take time in
itself. So the trips will be longer. The other impact that I am very concerned
about is the impact of those people that decide, well, I'm not going to bother
getting on a Redlands bus at all. I am going to drive to Carindale and park in
local streets, and catch a Brisbane bus. We know that will happen.
My submission also very strongly said that we need to have a look at making
better use of park 'n ride facilities such as the Chandler park 'n ride. At the
moment, there is a large park 'n ride at Chandler, and we are not allowed to
service it with Brisbane buses. It is in the City of Brisbane, but we do not have
the contract to run buses from the Chandler park 'n ride. My preference would
be to see if Redlands people are going to drive towards the city, they can drive
and park at Chandler, and then catch a Brisbane City Council bus from there.
There is adequate parking; it is a good facility. That would be a better outcome,
and that is one of the submissions that I made.
Ultimately, as I said, there are winners and losers in this proposal. What we
would like to see is for the State Government to take on board feedback from the
community, feedback from this Council, and make some common-sense
changes. I refer to the TransLink website. There is a section on the TransLink
website that says: what happens next? It still says, we still have a lot of work to
do to implement this plan. They are right about that. There is a lot of work to do,
and I would say a lot of changes to make as we go forward.
I think we can get a positive outcome out of this, but a couple of things need to
happen. First, Brisbane's contribution to the bus network needs to be
acknowledged; our investment in the bus network needs to be acknowledged.
The efficiency of our services need to be acknowledged. Also, the feedback of
the public needs to be incorporated in this so we can get a great outcome for
Brisbane and move forward with continuing growth in public transport.
Acting Chairman:
Thank you, DEPUTY MAYOR; Councillor ABRAHAMS.
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chair. I rise to enter the debate and to discuss the
motion. We have had considerable debate today on this matter, and we have not
yet had any debate from the LNP councillors to the motion. We are very clear as
Labor councillors that we have heard nothing from the LORD MAYOR or his
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 18 Deputy about this review until today in the Council Chamber, and that is a direct
result of a Labor notice of motion to debate the issue.
So it's no wonder we supported it, because we support a position where Council
seriously enters into negotiations with the State Government to say: this review
must be thrown out and a whole new look of proposals must be considered.
When we look at the motion, we note the prices have gone up; we note the need
for a review. Then we get to the two active components of this motion: one is to
ask the State Government to immediately reconsider route changes—only the
significant impact route changes, and those that represent residents, seniors and
infirmed, not those that do not have a car, not school children, not the
community in general, but specifically those listed.
The next part of this motion is to desist in cuts in peak hour, and we have
already seen that buses actually provide a service to the community in peak hour
and non-peak hour, so why would we qualify what time of service on any area,
unless you read a bit further, and then the motion again has significant
overcrowding—not just overcrowding—significant overcrowding on key
routes—not all routes—key routes. So I would suggest to you there are so many
weasel words in this motion when you deconstruct this motion, it is saying the
State Government really needs to reconsider and do nothing.
Do you know why I am sure that is the intent of this motion? It was how it was
debated. What did the LORD MAYOR say? Did he mention the issue of
immediate reconsideration in his debate? No. Did he mention desist from the
cuts? No. Instead of which, he wanted to condemn Labor and he wanted the
theory. Similarly, when Councillor MATIC spoke, did he mention either of
those issues? No. He talked about defending the review. He talked about the
intent of the review, and then only when Labor asked Councillor SCHRINNER
to comment, did in fact he talk about his concerns with the proposal.
The one issue missing is that there is no consultation.
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
I hereby move an amendment to this.
MOTION FOR AMENDMENT:
505/2012-13
It was moved by Councillor Helen ABRAHAMS, seconded by Councillor Steve GRIFFITHS that the motion
be amended by the addition of the following paragraph:
Council further urges the State Government to extend the public consultation period for a period of
three months to ensure all bus passengers are fully aware of the proposed changes.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor ABRAHAMS, to the amendment, please.
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chair. We need an appropriate time so that the
community can understand the impact of the changes. Just in committee this
morning, Councillor MATIC said that he had not had time to fully realise the
impact, yet clearly from his discussion, he has had his fingers all over the
review. He was able to give extreme detail in terms of the tiers of services, the
interchanges, the fact that TransLink is performing very well now at this time.
But the residents across Brisbane don't have that luxury. They only know the
bus services that they use.
They need to go through at this stage a website to get information. I would
suggest to you that immediately disenfranchises a significant number of those
who use buses. It disenfranchises many of the people going to school. It
disenfranchises the aged. It disenfranchises those who are ill. It disenfranchises
those who are not computer savvy and you would certainly need to have some
degree of skill to go on to the TransLink website and understand the impact of
what is happening.
It is not on the front page. You've got to enter it and go through a number of
areas to even get any understanding or logic of it. Then, when you come to the
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 19 survey, the survey is one of those beautiful eSurveys. You can only answer the
question that has been given a box. You cannot even say I am so outraged
because I wish to tell you, TransLink, that I use this bus service to do these three
tasks in a day, and this is how I will be impacted. I swear to you it is impossible
to do that adequately in this survey, and you've only got two weeks to in fact be
able to do that.
Many of the community hear from their church activities, from their
organisational activities, from their families who give them information, and I
would suggest to you that they already have got the clock ticking against them
and will have no time to really be familiar with what is going on. But we are
also asking for three months because that gives every Councillor in this
Chamber time to get organised, time to be able to produce a flyer and a leaflet,
time to get that out into the community and adequately explain what changes
have become BUZs (Bus Upgrade Zone).
It gives time for us to ask TransLink if BUZ that has a timetable of 15 minutes
or better, does that mean my BUZ, 199, will keep its four-minute, five-minute,
six-minute service, or will it become a 15-minute service? I need to know that to
inform the community. I need time to go through the process of the Minister of
Transport office to get an answer to that so I can tell the community whether in
fact the major bus through the main shopping centre of West End is significantly
going to be changed or not.
So, in summary, there is no time for the community to do their networking faceto-face, which is how it works. There is no time for people to become familiar
with the online survey and be able to appropriately let the minister know what is
happening. There is no time for local Councillors to get the specific and accurate
information so we are making sure there is informed debate. That is why we
need, as a Council, bipartisan support to say extend the information and the
consultation period.
LORD MAYOR, you are the one that makes the call on this. LORD MAYOR,
you are so proud of how you have extended the consultation time with the new
City Plan. Therefore, if it is good for the City Plan, it is certainly good for this
transport review because, in the short term and the long term, this will have as
much significance to many residents and even more so.
By conclusion, do you know why this is so important? In the one suburb in my
ward that has had its two bus services cut, 17 per cent of that suburb don't own a
car. With this one move, they are losing all access to public transport. Public,
because it is a service; transport, because it moves them around. That suburb,
and those 17 per cent of residents in that suburb, in just a flick of a pen, don't
have any access to the hospital, any access to their shopping centre. I would
want more than two weeks to be able to tell them the impact of this review.
Acting Chairman:
Further debate on the amendment; Councillor GRIFFITHS.
Councillor GRIFFITHS:
Yes, thanks Madam Acting Chair. I note that no LNP members have attempted
to stand up to speak to this motion, or even to speak against this particular
amendment. I really am concerned that this whole process today has been a bit
of a process of crocodile tears by the LNP. It has been a bit of a stunt. The fact
that no backbenchers have got up to stand up to speak in relation to any of this is
of real concern to me. I even note that Councillor WINES is on Twitter saying
how long the debate is going on for, and that concerns me that someone sitting
here in this Chamber on Twitter, that they are not actually getting up and
participating in this debate and representing their residents. That was the same
Councillor who said the review is good.
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman:
Order! Order!
Councillor GRIFFITHS:
You're off message, Councillor WINES.
But I am standing up to support this amendment. This is a good amendment
because it is what we should be on about. We should be on about getting this
State Government to increase the consultation period. People are being duped.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 20 They know they are being duped. It has been the LNP State Government that are
doing it. Residents who have already had a go at putting in feedback for this
consultation process, residents who I represent who work at the universities, are
saying what a sham it is.
I have this from one of the residents. 'I have now completed the online survey
and have posted it, and as a university lecturer, I teach research methods, and
this survey as an instrument is deeply flawed.' I have another resident who says
that, 'Basically this review, just like most reviews out of public service, has a
low standard of methodology and rigour. If submitted to a scientific journal, it
would be undoubtedly rejected.' We need to get some decent consultation in
there. We need to go out and listen to the people. It needs to be transparent. We
need to be making sure that residents are heard.
I am particularly concerned for the residents of Archerfield and Acacia Ridge
who no longer have a direct service to the city, and now in fact have to travel for
20 minutes to Garden City before they can make it into the city. Residents of
Rocklea now don't have a bus service, and for me residents of Salisbury,
Tarragindi and Moorooka particularly the old, the disadvantaged, a number of
students, but also our multicultural community, our refugee community, who
use buses, have no way of using these services now that they have been so
extensively cut.
So, LORD MAYOR, I would ask you to come out with me, come out with the
Labor councillors—at least we have got a bit of energy and desire to do
something—and do public meetings. Come and face the public. Talk to the
public. Listen to them. I am happy to organise meetings with our refugees and
with our seniors. I am happy to organise meetings with students and anyone who
wants to come along and have them talk to you. You are saying that, oh, you did
not know this was under way. LORD MAYOR, come out and face the people.
Come out and we will do hall meetings. Come out and we will do group
meetings. We can stand on the street corner and I will organise for the public to
be there.
LORD MAYOR, this is your opportunity to stand up and face the community.
Unfortunately, I don't think that is going to happen. I certainly know that won't
happen from the transport chair, because he's got absolutely no idea about what
is going on with this review. From listening to his speech, I could not work out
whether he was in favour of the review or against it. He seemed to spend more
time attacking the ALP than any amount of time actually speaking about the
review and the significant impact it will have on Brisbane residents. In fact,
today it was embarrassing that he was doing a presentation on ferry services—
Acting Chairman:
To the amendment.
Councillor GRIFFITHS:
—from the 1800s.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor GRIFFITHS—
Councillor GRIFFITHS:
Madam Acting Chair, it was embarrassing.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor GRIFFITHS, to the amendment which is about public consultation,
thank you—
Councillor GRIFFITHS:
I agree, Madam Acting Chair.
Acting Chairman:
—in respect of the date.
Councillor GRIFFITHS:
We need to get back to public consultation. We need to get back to listening to
the people. We need to get back in touch with the people. This Council did have
a good track record with public transport. It has lost it under this Administration,
and more so it has lost it under the sham of this LNP State Government which I
am certain, and which strangely enough I got an email from an LNP member,
and she says, 'Why are we surprised? He wants to privatise bus services.' An
LNP member, putting that in writing to me; is there any wonder that these
people have so little fire in their belly for dealing with this issue? They are just
covering their tracks. They are not really interested in change.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 21 What I want to see is get up, stop the crocodile tears, and actually show some
fire in your belly, show some interest in protecting the services of the people of
Brisbane because this issue won't go away. This issue won't go away. This is a
fire storm that will not go away because you are taking basic services away from
residents. You are taking basic services—
Acting Chairman:
To the amendment, Councillor GRIFFITHS.
Councillor GRIFFITHS:
The LNP are taking basic services away from residents, and they need to be
consulted. They want to be consulted. Doing a two-week consultation period is a
sham. It is an absolute sham, and we need to be out there saying we will be
doing a three-month consultation period, and we will be getting the best result
we can for our residents. Thank you, Madam Acting Chair.
Acting Chairman:
Further debate; LORD MAYOR.
LORD MAYOR:
Thanks very much, Madam Acting Chairman. The Administration will not be
supporting this particular amendment. But we will be putting up an amendment
of our own in respect of the same subject matter once this matter has been
determined. I am interested to hear Councillor GRIFFITHS say that the Labor
administration had a good record and it is now lost under this Administration.
He might want to explain how they managed to increase public transport use by
just 4 million in 13 years, 8 per cent against a 20 per cent population growth. If
that is a good record to him, Madam Acting Chairman—
Councillor GRIFFITHS interjecting
Acting Chairman:
Order!
LORD MAYOR:
He is very good at talking about public meetings—
Acting Chairman:
Just a moment, please, LORD MAYOR. Councillor GRIFFITHS, as I have
previously warned Councillor ABRAHAMS and Councillor JOHNSTON, the
calling out across this Chamber will be considered an act of disorder. I have
asked that it cease and desist. If anyone else continues with that sort of
behaviour, it will be treated accordingly. LORD MAYOR, please continue.
Okay, further debate; Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Yes, Madam Acting Chairman, to the motion, which is about consultation. I
certainly welcome the amendment as it has been put, and I am happy to support
it. I think that the two rounds of consultation we have had to date have been a
joke, one in September which was two weeks, and another in December, but two
weeks before Christmas, where these major changes were flagged. As we have
heard from Councillor ABRAHAMS, only those people who have access to a
computer were able to make a submission.
I wrote out to the seniors groups in my area, and I also wrote out to the
retirement village residents and told them to write to the Premier and the
Transport Minister if they did not have a computer, and I know many of them
took me up on that offer, because they copied me in on their letters. So yet again
now the State Government is undertaking what it calls consultation and doing it
in a way that bars or prohibits access to a huge portion of the population that
will be most directly affected by these changes. That is not good enough. Three
months gives both the State Government and Council time to engage in proper
consultation with residents, to write to them, to allow them to write back to us.
We know that is the way predominately that older people like to communicate. I
am not saying they cannot use computers, but I know they like to write letters.
So I think it is very important that we ensure there is proper consultation. The
South-East Queensland Bus Network Review Phase 1: listen to the locals. Phase
2: listen to the locals. Well, that is not changing whatsoever, because we know
they are not listening. They did not listen after the first round of consultation;
they did not listen after the third round of consultation, and it is highly likely
they will not listen now.
What I will say is that I suspect this is what Councillor MATIC knows. In his
stunning effort as chair this morning, this was his feedback about—this is the
one bit of why would we have a discussion about it? Councillor GRIFFITHS
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 22 will remember this. In knocking us back, we asked for presentations, we
asked—
Acting Chairman;
Councillor JOHNSTON, the amendment is about the extension of the public
consultation period. Draw yourself back to the amendment, or I will sit you
down.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Yes, Madam Acting Chairman. To the amendment, Councillor MATIC this
morning basically said why would we bother discussing this further because
why would anything be different now? That is a direct quote from Councillor
MATIC this morning. Councillor MATIC knows that his motion here today is
simply a stunt. Why would anything be different now?
So it is clear Councillor MATIC knows Council was not listened to before, and
now he is just moving a motion to seem to be doing something. Well, this
amendment before us today now gives him an opportunity to put his money
where his mouth is, to write out to his residents, to write to his groups, to go and
have a meeting with his counterpart which he has not done since this review
started, because I ask him week after week. Councillor MATIC is the local
Councillor as well, where Scott Emerson is the state member, and he will not
have a meeting with his own state member.
Acting Chairman:
Right; Councillor JOHNSTON, I have asked you to come back to the
amendment which is about the period of public consultation. You have
continued to talk about Mr Emerson and Councillor MATIC; resume your seat.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
I am talking—
Acting Chairman:
Further debate.
Councillor JOHNSTON interjecting
Acting Chairman:
No further debate? Councillor ABRAHAMS, your right of reply on the
amendment.
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Madam Acting Chair, thank you. I just restate why we have made this
amendment, but in doing so, you can't help but be overwhelmed by the lack of
input from the LNP Councillors, and the LORD MAYOR saying sometime in
the future of this debate, he will make some amendment.
A councillor interjecting:
Why didn't he put it in the motion?
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Absolutely. Thank you very much, I will take that interjection. It would indicate
that yet again we in the Opposition are dictating the agenda of this meeting and
the motions and this campaign. But at the heart of it, may it be quite clear, the
Liberal National Party in this Chamber are being dragged into a motion that will
look good on paper, but every word they have said in support of the motion is
literally supporting the review. They have reported the principles; they have
reported the structure of it; they have supported the need for the review. They
have used the argument of cost cutting as the reason for these cuts.
So, it is important that when there is going to be words said that aren't
meaningful that there is a long time of consultation so the community has time,
not only to write to their elected representative, but to write to the LORD
MAYOR and really clarify his position as their concerns for us on this side of
the Chamber, so the LORD MAYOR can be very clear when answering their
responses that he will not cut their specific community service, and that he will
defend them against Campbell Newman that cut, because that is true
consultation. That is consultation so people know how to vote, how we are
voting, and then how they will vote on the future. Because this issue, and these
cuts, are so serious that they will still have an impact when we go back to the
election.
It will need a change of government to restore the community services of our
bus service rather than just the commuter services, which is what this review is
delivering. So it is essential to have that time. It is essential to have the time for
us to consult, for the community to talk to the LORD MAYOR and get a straight
answer, for the community to be very clear of the impact, for those that are
disadvantaged, because they do not have access to websites and the survey, to
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 23 have another form of consultation as so respected. We need bipartisan—we
should have bipartisan support to this because we on the Labor side have always
tried to do it well and are committed to consultation. Those on the LNP actually
spoke about it, but never delivered it—
Councillor DICK:
Point of order, Madam Acting Chair.
Acting Chairman:
Point of order; Councillor DICK.
Councillor DICK:
Will Councillor ABRAHAMS take a question?
Acting Chairman:
Councillor ABRAHAMS?
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
I most certainly will.
Councillor DICK:
Councillor ABRAHAMS, have you just been advised that, as a result of this
debate today and in coordination with moving this motion, that the Transport
Minister has now just announced an extension of two weeks as part of the
consultation? Could you give any reflections on the views and the relations of
this amendment?
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman;
Order! Order! Councillor ABRAHAMS.
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Madam Acting Chair, we now know that the State Government is listening to
this debate. The State Government is listening to this debate and they are
running scared. The State Government are listening to this debate and have put
another two weeks of consultation. I embrace that, but it is not enough, because
we need also to make sure the form of consultation is wider and broader so all
the community can participate.
But Madam Acting Chair, the State Government listening to Council. Campbell
Newman, whom we know never—
Acting Chairman;
Councillor ABRAHAMS—
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
—protects—
Acting Chairman;
Councillor ABRAHAMS—
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
—never listens to what the LORD MAYOR is doing—
Acting Chairman:
For the third time, Councillor ABRAHAMS, Campbell Newman is not in the
amendment. Bring it back to the extension of the public—
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman:
Order! Bring your comments back to the extension of the public consultation
period, please.
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
I will sum up by saying, if the State Government thinks there is merit in this
argument, I really would urge the LORD MAYOR to have courage, not to be
brow-beaten by the Premier, and stand up for Brisbane and support our threemonths consultation.
Acting Chairman:
I will now put the amendment.
Amendment put
Upon being submitted to the meeting the motion for the amendment was declared lost on the voices.
Thereupon, Councillors DICK and ABRAHAMS immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in
the amendment being declared lost.
The voting was as follows:
AYES: 7 -
The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Milton DICK, and Councillors
Helen ABRAHAMS, Peter CUMMING, Kim FLESSER, Steve GRIFFITHS,
Victoria NEWTON, and Nicole JOHNSTON.
NOES: 18 -
The Right Honourable the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK,
DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 24 ADAMS,
Matthew BOURKE,
Amanda
COOPER,
Vicki
HOWARD,
Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Geraldine KNAPP, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC,
Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN-TAYLOR,
Julian SIMMONDS, Andrew WINES, and Norm WYNDHAM.
Debate on substantive motion continued
Acting Chairman;
We will now return to the substantive motion. We will resume the debate.
Further debate; Councillor KING.
Councillor KING:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chair; I rise today to support this motion, but in
particular, I want to put my concerns about the capacity at the Chermside bus
interchange, that these changes that the State Government are proposing will
have. The Chermside regional centre is one of the largest across Brisbane, and it
only has the capacity for five buses at this particular interchange, unlike the one
at Garden City, which has the capacity for 23 buses.
With these changes, it is proposed that our bus services will terminate and
people will have to transfer to another bus, these changes will happen at the
Chermside bus station. What my concerns are as well, not only do we not have
the capacity at the Chermside bus interchange, but also the intersection of
Hamilton and Gympie Road is already seriously congested. What impacts will
this have on our buses trying to get into the interchange when there are only five
bus stations there?
We already have up to approximately 8000 people a day that use this
interchange at Chermside. The effects that it has on the outer suburbs, I have
already calls from my Aspley area ringing up and saying, it already takes 40
minutes for us to commute from Aspley to the city; how much longer is it going
to take that we now have to get off the bus at Chermside and transfer to another
bus to continue our trip into the city? They are commuters. It is not only
commuters that this actually impacts; it is our school students as well. I have
three high schools I will talk about that students travel by bus to get to. That is
Padua, Mount Alvernia and Craigslea High. These students will now have to
change at the Chermside bus interchange to continue their trip to the schools.
One elderly lady said she was concerned about coming home from the CBD,
especially in the winter months, and having to get off at the Chermside bus
interchange, getting on to another bus to continue her trip. She did not want to
get off at the Chermside bus station to continue her trip home. She feels, rightly
or wrongly, she feels nervous about getting off at the Chermside bus
interchange.
We have to stand up for our residents with these changes. That is what this side
of the Chamber are doing. We are putting our residents first, unlike those
opposite who are just—
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman:
Order! Order!
Councillor KING:
—blabbering around and doing the cheap political shots, and oh, we did this and
we did that. Madam Acting Chair, They did nothing. They did not stand up for
their residents—
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman;
Order!
Councillor KING:
—for 20 years. They did not stand up for their residents over the many years
when 15 per cent hikes in our bus fares went up and up. If they were really
concerned, they would have got up and said, my residents in my ward,
especially Councillor DICK who gets up and puff, puff, puff, puff, political
garbage, political garbage, spin, spin, spin, how good I am; he should have been
standing up and actually saying, my residents from Inala cannot afford to catch
the bus on a daily basis.
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman:
Order!
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 25 Councillor KING:
A review was needed; yes, it was needed to our bus services, because our
residents across Brisbane can no longer take 15 per cent bus price increase
across our city every year.
But I do have concerns for my residents in my ward and the Chermside bus
interchange, as I started with. The Chermside bus interchange does not just
service the people of the Marchant Ward. It services the people from Northgate
Ward, from Councillor NEWTON's ward, Councillor COOPER's ward, and also
Councillor WYNDHAM's ward. It services the majority of the north side
residents. Not only do those students—I know a lot of Councillor COOPER's
residents travel into the city for them to either go to university or to the schools.
Now those students will have to take two buses. This should be about fast and
efficient public service. This was what will keep people on our buses and not
jumping into their cars because it is easier for them to do so.
Like the others on this side of the Chamber, I support this motion. I do not
believe that the other side of the Chamber actually support it, because we have
not heard much out of their mouths to say that they support it.
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman:
Order!
Councillor KING:
Only the political stories and the spin that they want to put on it. Stand up for
your residents, especially you, Councillor DICK. You are the leader—
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman:
Order!
Councillor KING:
—of the Opposition. If you want your residents to start paying 15 per cent every
year increase, like you have been putting up with for the last 10 years, go ahead,
Councillor DICK. Thank you.
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman:
Order! Councillor NEWTON.
Councillor NEWTON:
Yes, thanks very much, Madam Acting Chair; I rise to speak in favour of this
motion which I just wanted to remind the Chamber was actually seconded by
Councillor DICK, given he had already placed on the record a motion last
Thursday to put the very same issue on the agenda today.
I rise to speak in favour of this motion because I am absolutely furious about the
axe that has been taken to bus services for residents in Deagon Ward. I am not
the only one. My office has been inundated with residents who are angry, upset,
in tears about the fact that they are losing so many bus services in the area. What
concerns me is this so-called review under the guise of efficiency is really about
servicing high frequency routes and not providing a true public transport option
for people in Brisbane.
I used to be a really big fan and supporter of TransLink. I remember when the
agreement was signed between the previous Labor Council, who worked very
hard with the previous Labor Government, to form TransLink. The idea behind
that was to create a seamless opportunity for crossing over from one mode to
another, providing one ticket across different parts of the city, and providing
consistency with public transport. What it also was supposed to do was ensure
that we adhered to the TransLink policy which states quite clearly that it is
intended, when it comes to bus services, that bus stop spacing on a route is
ideally placed between 400 metres and 800 metres for most services to make
sure that people are able to access public transport in this city.
What has happened in Deagon Ward is that an axe has been wielded to these
services, and we see people that will be left stranded as a result. I know for
many in Deagon Ward, people have made a decision about where they live
based on where those public transport services are. Of course, you cannot shift a
train line, and the train line has been running through the area in some aspects
for over 140 years. But when it comes to bus services, what we are seeing is a
significant loss of bus services.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 26 This review has seen the death of the 'whiz' bus service, named affectionately
after the old whizzer that used to run around Sandgate in the earlier part of the
1900s. This wiz service came about after a Maureen Hayes bus review in the
1990s where work was done to change and create what is now the 310 bus
service, which has also been cut by the way. The 311, 312, 313 and 314 were
supposed to provide a local community service. This particularly targets school
students, the older people in our community, the infirm, to make sure that they
can get around and see the doctor, get to the hairdresser, buy their groceries.
These are not necessarily daily commuters going to and from work, so it is hard
to compare apples with apples when you are talking about residents like these
who need to get around their local community against the needs of people who
are using it for commuter transport. Public transport should cater for both. It is
not about everyone getting into the CBD for work. This idea of public transport
is so that people should be able to get around their communities.
What really concerns me is that this is a distinct attack on the infirm and elderly.
I know that our senior’s policy in Council identifies that there are significant
numbers of older people in Deagon Ward, particularly around Brighton and
Sandgate. What worries me is we are seeing bus services cut from the very
doorsteps of Department of Housing pensioner units, the very people who need
this service, the very people who cannot afford to have a car.
Sorry, I have a head cold; I apologise. Over the past 12 months, I have had a
number of conversations with older residents around public transport options, as
I have done throughout my time as local Councillor. I am reflecting on some
recent conversations I have had with people, residents who live in Rogan Road
at the pensioner units wanting to be able to get to the Taigum shops, were so
excited to see a new bus service installed less than 12 months ago. That service
has now been axed, thanks to Campbell Newman.
What about the residents at Yundah Street at Shorncliffe where there is a
massive amount of Department of Housing residents living there, who used to
catch the whiz bus to be able to get to their local shops. Well, that is gone. These
are residents who cannot walk too far. Local residents tell me that when their
spouses had passed away and they were the people who had the driver's licence,
they were so pleased to be able to access the whiz bus service. It is now gone.
Services like the 326, 325, 327, 328 through the community that were not
necessarily high frequency services, but they stopped frequently, which made it
very accessible for people.
That is why this side of the Chamber at the last election supported free off-peak
travel on our buses for seniors, because we recognise the importance of taking
care of the older people in our community. The thing that makes public transport
work well is reliability and frequency. What we are seeing is that taken away
from our most vulnerable in our community. I know that the State LNP
Government seems to have something in for older people in Deagon Ward. They
are already kicking residents out of Eventide Nursing Home and shutting the
doors on them, and now we are seeing their public transport services ripped
apart.
I won't stand for it. I know that the residents won't stand for it, and I will be
supporting my residents to make sure that their views are known. I know that
they are not receiving a great reception at the state member's offices currently,
which is disappointing. I hope that they have a change of heart and listen to their
residents, and take a stand against Campbell Newman and his heartless axewielding efforts on public transport in Deagon Ward.
Acting Chairman:
Further debate; Councillor HUANG.
Councillor HUANG:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman. I rise to speak on the motion. We have
heard a very thorough and comprehensive debate from both sides of the
Chamber on this motion and the bus review. According to the UITP (which has
a French name, but in English is the International Association of Public
Transport) a sustainable public transport system needs to achieve a good balance
in social justice and economic sense, and that is what this Administration is
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 27 advocating. That is why we put forward this motion in response to the bus
review.
This Administration is standing up for the residents of this city to ensure we can
continue to enjoy a sustainable and efficient bus service in our city. I would like
to encourage all Councillors in this Chamber to support this motion.
506/2012-13
Motion be now put
It was moved by Councillor HUANG, seconded by Councillor WINES, that the motion be now put. Upon being
submitted to the Chamber, the motion, that the motion be now put, was declared carried on the voices.
Thereupon, Councillors DICK and ABRAHAMS immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in
the motion being declared carried.
The voting was as follows:
AYES: 18 The Right Honourable the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK,
DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista
ADAMS,
Matthew BOURKE,
Amanda
COOPER,
Vicki
HOWARD,
Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Geraldine KNAPP, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC,
Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN-TAYLOR,
Julian SIMMONDS, Andrew WINES, and Norm WYNDHAM.
NOES: 7 -
The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Milton DICK, and Councillors
Helen ABRAHAMS, Peter CUMMING, Kim FLESSER, Steve GRIFFITHS,
Victoria NEWTON, and Nicole JOHNSTON.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor MATIC, your right of reply.
Councillor MATIC:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman. Well, what an interesting debate we have
had this afternoon. We put forward a motion quite clearly from this side of the
Chamber that speaks for itself, a motion that clearly sets out that we understand
the need—
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Point of order, Madam Deputy Chairman.
Acting Chairman:
Just a moment, Councillor MATIC; point of order, Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Genuinely, Madam Acting Chairman, I just wonder if you have missed a
speaker, because there was supposed to be another amendment coming from the
LORD MAYOR as he flagged earlier.
Acting Chairman:
No. Councillor MATIC, please continue.
Councillor MATIC:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman. A motion that clearly sets out an
acknowledgement about fare increases and the need for a review, the importance
of the fact that previous ALP (Australian Labor Party) administrations in this
Council have conducted reviews as well into the bus network, and importantly
also, this Council noting that there must be adequate feedback provided to the
State Government on what it is proposing.
We have seen speakers from this side of the Chamber clearly articulate their
concerns about the network review and the impacts in their wards. We have seen
the LORD MAYOR speak on the same issues. We see quite clearly that the
LORD MAYOR has consistently, since August last year, in this Chamber
spoken on this issues, raised his concerns and points of views, and we see that
reaffirmed today.
What we clearly see from this side of the Chamber is an Administration
committed to public transport through enormous amounts of investment and
what we have seen is growth. What we have is a Brisbane City Council under
this Administration that has seen record patronage increases. What we are
saying to the State Government is that we are carrying the load for the rest of
SEQ (South East Queensland), and we should not be disadvantaged for that.
We are clearly saying to the State Government that, despite the review, there are
a number of concerns which must be listened to in all our respective wards.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 28 There will be impacts for all of us. The very nature of the way that we catch
public transport will be changed, and that the removal of the BUZ services as we
know them as express will be changed through the high frequency network that
they are introducing. We will see significant changes through the super stations
and the impacts of that are yet to be known.
There are so many aspects of this report that still have many questions, but it is
this side of the Chamber that is asking those questions and sending a very clear
message to the State Government that there must be further investigation of
those issues.
What we see from those opposite are councillors talking about themselves,
either in their quest for a Federal seat at some point in the future, shadows like
Councillor GRIFFITHS—you would not even know it, the Shadow ALP
spokesman for public transport, did not throughout his entire speech once
mention the network review or any aspect of it. He did not even mention any
aspect of the review, because he fails to actually understand it, if he had in fact
read it.
He speaks about the committee meeting this morning, and do you know, Madam
Acting Chairman, I will speak more to this in my own committee report, he
actually said to me, so what do you think about it? What do you personally think
about it?' He did not actually raise the issue, in general business as he could
have done, about the review itself. He did not detail any of the specifics.
In fact, his ALP colleague, in support, Councillor JOHNSTON, supported his
position and then misquoted me in this Chamber today about business as usual,
none of which is actually the truth. It is an absolute joke what we see from those
opposite.
I say to those opposite: put the politics aside for once and think of—
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman:
Order! Order!
Councillor MATIC:
—and think of the residents of Brisbane. I call on them to support this motion—
Councillors interjecting
Councillor MATIC:
—to send a clear message—
Acting Chairman:
Order!
Councillor MATIC:
—to the State Government and TransLink, that we acknowledge the need for a
review. We acknowledge the need for fare reductions, but also that the State
must acknowledge that the changes they are proposing will have impacts in our
wards. As the LORD MAYOR said, there will be winners and losers in this, and
our role as a Council, as this Administration has done in the past, continues to
do now, and will in the future, is represent the interests of Brisbane residents. At
the end of the day, that is what is most important.
Through our continued investment, through our ability to make those
representations, through the public consultation process that the State has
extended, and the ALP has laughingly told us that somehow that George Street
has now listened to them and extended it based on their amendment, as if they
are listening to anything Councillor ABRAHAMS has to say when she cannot
even clearly delineate what it is that she represents within her own ward on this
issue.
These are the kinds of things that we need to get past from those opposite.
Councillor CUMMING, who could not even get up and speak today at all.
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman;
Order!
Councillor MATIC:
He had the opportunity.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Not when we're gagged from it.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 29 Councillor MATIC:
This is a serious debate, and we need to move in a serious manner. I say to the
ALP—
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman;
Order!
Councillor MATIC:
—put the politics aside, start thinking about Brisbane residents like this side of
the Chamber is, and support this motion.
Councillors interjecting
Acting Chairman:
I will now—once this Chamber is quiet—
Councillor interjecting:
Acting Chairman:
Councillor CUMMING! I will now put the motion.
Motion put
The Chairman submitted the motion the Chamber resulting in its being declared carried on the voices.
Thereupon, Councillors MATIC and NEWTON immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in
the motion being declared carried unanimously.
The voting was as follows:
AYES: 25 -
The Right Honourable the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK,
DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors
Krista ADAMS, Matthew BOURKE, Amanda COOPER, Vicki HOWARD,
Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Geraldine KNAPP, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC,
Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN-TAYLOR,
Julian SIMMONDS, Andrew WINES, and Norm WYNDHAM, and the Leader of
the OPPOSITION, Councillor Milton DICK, and Councillors Helen ABRAHAMS,
Peter CUMMING, Kim FLESSER, Steve GRIFFITHS, Victoria NEWTON, and
Nicole JOHNSTON.
NOES: Nil.
ADJOURNMENT:
507/2012-13
At that time, 3.57pm, it was resolved on the motion of Councillor MURPHY, seconded by Councillor MARX,
that the meeting adjourn for a period of 15 minutes, to commence only when all councillors had vacated the
Chamber and the doors locked.
Council stood adjourned at 3.59pm.
UPON RESUMPTION:
QUESTION TIME:
Acting Chairman:
Are there any questions of the LORD MAYOR or a chairman of any of the
standing committees? Councillor HUANG.
Question 1
Councillor HUANG:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman. My question is to the LORD MAYOR.
LORD MAYOR I understand that Brisbane has a growing reputation in Hong
Kong and China for professional services, resources, culture, major events and
tourism. Can you please detail what is being done by this administration to
ensure that Brisbane can take advantage of our growing reputation in Asian
markets?
Acting Chairman:
LORD MAYOR.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 30 LORD MAYOR:
Yes thanks very much, Madam Acting Chair. I thank Councillor HUANG for the
question. Well, Madam Acting Chairman, today I had the pleasure and
opportunity to launch what is called Choose Brisbane. I guess everybody in this
chamber acknowledges, Madam Acting Chairman, why choosing Brisbane is a
good idea in terms of investment, in terms of being a part of the economic
growth of our city and all that it has to offer. This is a program which as part of
our broader economic development plan has a key focus on the Asia Pacific
region with a target on Hong Kong, on Shanghai and Beijing.
This, Madam Acting Chairman, is a program which very much as Councillor
HUANG has indicated is an outreach to those parts of the Asia Pacific which
focuses on the professional services, the resources, the education, culture and
major events and tourism components of what our city has to offer. We
described ourselves as Brisbane, Australia's new world city. We have that tag of
the G20 city where we join other cities like London, Seoul, Washington DC and
Toronto as G20 cities. Madam Acting Chairman, this push into the Hong Kong
and Chinese cities is very much about acknowledging that we are already the
recipients in Queensland of significant investment from those parts of the world,
$12 billion in fact over the last five years, against an Australian investment of
$43 billion.
We believe that there is more that we can do both to grow the investment and to
grow the jobs that will inevitably come as a result of those investments. So to
that extent we are looking for further investments, investments in hotels, Madam
Acting Chairman, as one example. But we are already seeing significant
investment in that space, refurbishment of hotels locally. However, we want to
see more investments on top of those new hotels that will be opening over the
next year or two, such as the Gambaro's hotel, Madam Acting Chairman, another
one in the Valley, which is ready to get up and underway.
So those particular hotel investments are just three but we believe that there is a
significant opportunity to sell the message further afield. So, Madam Acting
Chairman, this is about forging strong relationships. We have our sister cities.
They will continue to be our major focus but this is a specific area. This is a
campaign which utilises a number of both local entities and indeed people who
have visited our City of Brisbane who are major entities, recognised entities, as
well as people who are visiting our city next year, to come to the point the G20
leaders, headed of course by President Barack Obama.
So we are utilising those faces and names as part and parcel of an advertising
campaign into those cities that I mentioned. It is a campaign where we will
utilise not only our own resources but it will be about making sure that we
piggyback onto other opportunities that we have in those cities. We know from
the Jones Lang LaSalle report, Madam Acting Chairman, that Brisbane was
recently ranked fourth among the most sought after locations for hotel
investments in the world. So we want to capitalise on that by making sure that
that the investment sentiment is maximised to the very full.
Acting Chairman:
Further questions? Councillor DICK.
Question 2
Councillor DICK:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman. My question is to the LORD MAYOR.
LORD MAYOR with so many bus routes being cut by your LNP State
Government how many Brisbane Transport jobs in our city do you believe could
be lost?
Acting Chairman:
LORD MAYOR.
LORD MAYOR:
Well that's a hypothetical question, Madam Acting Chairman, and one which I'm
certainly not going to respond to today. I would say this that there is now a
month ahead for the public to comment. This is a phased introduction is what I
am advised and that's not what I'm advised, that's what everybody has been
advised by the media, Madam Acting Chairman, around that. Can I say that I do
not expect that we will be seeing cuts in jobs at all. We have been made aware
for some time that there was a bus review coming up. I will be meeting with Mr
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 31 Matters next week to discuss the issues around that, the things that will affect his
members.
But, Madam Acting Chairman, I just say this that it is far too early, far too early,
for anybody to be making any judgement calls about job losses. I don't expect
there will be any. I do know this that we have as an organisation not been
engaging fulltime permanent bus drivers now for some months because the last
thing you want to do is to engage bus drivers on a fulltime permanent basis only
then to have those jobs lost.
So for that reason, Madam Acting Chairman, I don't think that there will be any
significant impact if indeed any impact at all and I would be hoping the latter to
be the case around bus driver jobs. So, Madam Acting Chairman, that's the
position. As you know we were on a path of growth in Brisbane Transport. That
was a reality. We have to be pragmatic about that because we don't want to be
engaging people on a permanent basis only then to see state government
decisions force those people out of those roles.
So, Madam Acting Chairman, I trust that that will respond adequately to the
leader of the Opposition's question. He's entitled to ask more down the track but
I'm not going to. The State government has just announced that there's going to
be a further four weeks public consultation giving a comprehensive answer on
things that are hypothetical. If he wants to ask me hypothetical questions I'll give
him an answer to the best of my ability but he needn't be dissatisfied when one
does ask hypothetical questions. So, Madam Acting Chairman, I'm sure there
will be more discussion around this issue into the future.
Acting Chairman:
Further questions? Councillor MURPHY.
Question 3
Councillor MURPHY:
Thanks very much, Madam Acting Chairman. My question is to the Chairman of
the Public and Active Transport Committee, Councillor MATIC. Councillors
will be well aware of the massive improvements to the comfort of Council's bus
fleet. Can you provide a summary of the benefits that this administration has
delivered to bus passengers and advise of any alternative approaches?
Acting Chairman:
Councillor MATIC.
Councillor MATIC:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman, and I thank Councillor MURPHY for the
question. Madam Acting Chairman, this administration as councillors would
well know in this Chamber has always understood the importance of providing a
bus fleet that offers comfort and safety to the residents of Brisbane and the
people who visit our great city. That's why since 2008 we have invested record
amounts of money into our public and active transport networks. We
transformed our bus fleet from one of the oldest to one of the most modern,
comfortable and safest in Australia.
We've delivered, Madam Acting Chairman, 500 buses during 2008 to 2012 and
LORD MAYOR Graham QUIRK has a commitment to 360 new buses in this
term. On top of that, Madam Acting Chairman, we're making sure that we're
DDA compliant in respect of that service. Now, Madam Acting Chairman,
Council takes the comfort and safety and security of our passengers and the
general public seriously. That's why we've undertaken a number of important
initiatives. One hundred per cent of our BT fleet is now air-conditioned. In 2004,
Madam Acting Chairman, in the sweltering days under Labor that figure was just
35 per cent.
Labor failed to deliver a comfortable bus fleet to the people of Brisbane and that
was reflected in patronage numbers. Importantly too, Madam Acting Chairman,
they let the maintenance standards fall, leading to bus fires and safety issues.
Who can forget chariots of fire, hell on wheels; these are the kind of headings,
Madam Acting Chairman that we saw in the newspapers. The Courier-Mail for
example in 2000, Brisbane buses old and smoky, Brisbane's aging bus fleet has
had more than 500 breakdowns in the past two years as the city awaits the arrival
of 50 new gas buses, 50 new buses which didn't come, Madam Acting Chairman.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 32 In The Sunday Mail on 22 September 2002, Brisbane buses are dangerously
rundown with maintenance reports showing they take to the road each day with a
catalogue of defects. Madam Acting Chairman, that is unacceptable and this
administration changed that. The average age, Madam Acting Chairman, of our
fleet is 7.12 years which is one of the lowest in Australia. Yet under previous
Labor administrations in 2000 for example, the average age of the Brisbane City
Council fleet was 6.5 years to 10 years since 1995 and that jumped, Madam
Acting Chairman that jumped significantly to a higher number beyond what we
have now.
So they went from a smaller age group, Madam Acting Chairman, to over 10 per
cent, to over 10 years, Madam Acting Chairman, and we have dropped that
down to 7.12. This administration, Madam Acting Chairman, extends further to
that in our area of commitment to safety and that's why we are installing CCTV
(Closed-circuit television), Madam Acting Chairman, in parts of our older fleet
and making sure that that is in all of our new buses. Now up to 307 buses will be
fitted with CCTV, Madam Acting Chairman, and there will be 250 retrofits
completed by 30 June 2013, with another 57 the following year.
What we are also seeing, Madam Acting Chairman is that important
commitment to DDA (Disability Discrimination Act) compliance. This LORD
MAYOR shows a full commitment to that and that's why we're spending record
amounts in that area. We're also seeing, Madam Acting Chairman, when we talk
about comfort, it's not only about CCTV, it's not only about air-conditioning and
safer trips. It's also, Madam Acting Chairman, about accessibility, about fast
services, efficient services from one point to another, Madam Acting Chairman,
and that's where the CityGlider service has made such an important contribution.
It is this side of the chamber that introduced that service, through the initial
service and now through the Maroon Glider as well, Madam Acting Chairman.
That's why, Madam Acting Chairman, this administration, when looking at the
TransLink review, wants to see those issues not be downgraded, Madam Acting
Chairman. That's why this side of the chamber, Madam Acting Chairman, is
interested in looking at the 444 BUZ in Moggill, Madam Acting Chairman, in
Councillor de WIT's ward. That's why, Madam Acting Chairman, this
administration as part of our TransLink review is looking at our existing BUZ
services and how they're going to be amended by the state government.
That's why this administration, Madam Acting Chairman, is focused on
economic development and looking at important runs like the CBD to Lone Pine
on the 445, Madam Acting Chairman, as a single trip. Under the amendments to
the TransLink review that will be a split trip, Madam Acting Chairman, from
city to Indooroopilly and from Indooroopilly out to Lone Pine, these are the
kinds of things that we want to see. The Greenslopes Private Hospital, Madam
Acting Chairman, and the continuation of that important service for all of the
people that need to go there including the fact that it now has extended its
maternity service.
Madam Acting Chairman, this is what this administration is focused on,
providing comfort, providing ease of access for all of Brisbane residents to get
around safely and comfortably, unlike those opposite, Madam Acting Chairman,
who do not have a plan, whose past record in this space is failure. We will
continue strongly.
Acting Chairman:
Further questions? Councillor DICK.
Question 4
Councillor DICK:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chair. My question is to the LORD MAYOR. LORD
MAYOR at today's debate we heard from Councillor SCHRINNER and
Councillor KING who both raised the important real issue of car-parking as a
result of the LNP State Government's bus reviews, not a hypothetical question
but a real issue as a result of the bus review. LORD MAYOR how will you
manage the massive increases in parking problems outlined by Councillor KING
and Councillor SCHRINNER around the shopping centres where your LNP state
government wants all bus connections to be concentrated.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 33 Acting Chairman:
LORD MAYOR.
LORD MAYOR:
Well, Madam Acting Chairman, I thank Councillor DICK for the question. It is a
fact of life that car-parking and Park n Rides have been an issue for some time,
the former Labor State Government failed to provide sufficient numbers of Park
‘n’ Rides. Madam Acting Chairman, that's not an issue that changes with a
change of government. Our position is very clear in regards to Park ‘n’ Rides.
We support Park n Rides, we think they are necessary in terms of the ability for
people to take up what I was referring to earlier in the points that I have made. I
said that we lived in a convenient society. Part of that convenient society is
people's desire to be able to Park n Ride.
There are lots of situations around public transport nodes however where that is
not an option unless you go about the task of resuming many households and I'm
not sure what Labor's position would be in respect of those. However, where it is
possible to do Park n Rides that's something, Madam Acting Chairman, that we
support. We will continue to support because we think that they are a welcome
and strong addition to the public transport network. Indeed the DEPUTY
MAYOR has demonstrated already that it can be achieved. There was a Park n
Ride established under this government at Carindale shopping centre.
So it is not as though Councillor DICK, they have done nothing in relation to
this. They have made a—or Labor didn't do any, they did a couple, they did a
couple, I give them their due, they did a couple out my way that I am aware of.
But having said that, there are already some runs on the board in terms of the
current government but will there be added pressure around depots? Well that is
our belief. Councillor KING enunciated that clearly, Councillor SCHRINNER
enunciated that clearly. I talked at a higher level in relation to the issue of public
transport connectivity, changing of modes, Madam Acting Chairman.
So Councillor DICK, my position on Park n Ride is not going to change. We will
continue to advocate for them as we should but we will not be building them, it's
not our role to build them. That is a functionality of the state government. It's
always been in their court and it will remain so. So I hope that adequately
answers your question on what is not a hypothetical question in this case.
Acting Chairman:
Further questions? Councillor MARX.
Question 5
Councillor MARX:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman. My question is to the DEPUTY MAYOR
and chairman of the Infrastructure Committee Councillor SCHRINNER. Would
you please outline this administration's commitment to developing new bus
infrastructure to cater for our city and are you aware of any alternative
approaches to planning for the future?
Acting Chairman:
DEPUTY MAYOR.
DEPUTY MAYOR:
Thank you Councillor MARX for the question. Look it is a good question
particularly given the current debate we're having on the bus network. One of the
things that this administration has been very careful to do is to plan ahead for the
future needs of our growing bus fleet. We have been buying more buses as
Councillor MATIC very clearly enunciated and this is not something that has
always happened in Brisbane City Council. There was a five year period under
Labor where only 60 buses were bought over that five year period, 60 buses. So
at the moment we're buying 90 buses a year. Last term we were buying 125
buses a year. Labor bought 60 buses in a five year period, which is an absolute
disgrace.
We know that because we've been putting more buses on the road, that there
needs to be more depots. Over this term and the past term we've been working
on that plan to make sure there is depot space available. Now for the first time in
many, many years a new bus depot was opened, Madam Acting Chairman, down
your way in Willawong and that was opened in 2009. Now before that as anyone
who's been around for a while can correct if I'm wrong, I think Garden City was
the last bus depot that was built. Garden City was built when I was in high
school.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 34 So, Madam Acting Chairman, Labor did not invest in bus depots. They simple
buried their heads in the sand and believed the problem would disappear. We've
taken the decision to have a plan for bus depots and to invest in them. So we
rolled out the Willawong bus depot and that was an award willing bus depot. The
building contractors Laing O'Rourke were awarded the Environmental Award at
the Engineers Australia 2010 Queensland Engineering Excellence Awards; The
Australian Institute of Architects awarded the Harry S Marks Award City Design
within Council for Sustainable Architecture.
This is actually a depot that was used by the Green Building Council of Australia
as a benchmark for the green star rating system for this type of facility. So it is
an awarded depot and anyone who's been there would know that it has been built
extremely well and in an environmentally friendly way. What's more, it was built
on an old landfill site as well which was making use of land that would
otherwise be difficult to reuse. So it was a great outcome at Willawong and the
next bus depot that was planned and rolled out was Sherwood. I have to say who
would stand up and oppose a bus depot, really, a bus depot that would deliver
extra services to your area, who would oppose it? Outrageous, outrageous.
Madam Acting Chairman, we have gotten on with the job of delivering the
Sherwood bus depot and once again an excellent quality facility. That depot has
room for 200 buses and accommodation for over 400 staff and as I said an
important piece of transport infrastructure in that part of Brisbane. Bus depots
are important because they help us minimise dead running costs. The fewer bus
depots you have the longer your buses have to travel at the start and end of their
routes. The more that costs TransLink and the more that costs Councils so
having bus depots at strategic locations around the city is absolutely vital to keep
the costs down and to improve efficiency.
So we've seen the bus depot at Sherwood rolled out but I have to say another
great result. Importantly as of March this year, the Sherwood depot has not had
any lost time injury days at all so it's had a great safety record. So that's been 382
LTI free and congratulations to the team out at the Sherwood bus depot for that
great record. In addition, they've also won the Brisbane Transport Christmas bus
decorating competition as well. So there's a great spirit, there's a great
camaraderie out there at the Sherwood depot.
Of course the other bus depot that we're working on right now and is nearing
completion in the not too distant future is the Eagle Farm bus depot, once again
located in a strategic part of the city that will experience future growth,
particularly around the Hamilton Northshore area. Once again, illustrates that we
are planning for the future.
Acting Chairman:
Further questions? Councillor DICK.
Question 6
Councillor DICK:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman. My question is to the LORD MAYOR.
LORD MAYOR Council's long established planning policy is for public
transport to run within 400 metres of all residential homes. LORD MAYOR, can
you advise the impacts of the state government's announcement to cut bus routes
in Brisbane and how this will impact on Council's 400 metre policy goal?
LORD MAYOR:
Yes thanks very much, Councillor DICK. Well clearly I would think this will
have a negative impact in some respects for some people and a positive impact
for other people. As I said earlier this bus review is a very comprehensive one. It
is one which will see winners and losers. So for some people they will be much
closer in terms of bus routes. For other people they will not be. The biggest issue
as I mentioned earlier from my point of view, is that of people having to do
intermodal trips or to see coupled trips on the same mode. So, Madam Acting
Chairman, in terms of the actual distances, of course, this Council has never
been able to achieve that goal in every instance of having bus services within
400 metres.
It's been one of those aspirational things that was set up many years ago by I
think probably the Labor Party at the time. It's been kept as part of an
aspirational policy on this Council. It has not always been achievable. So,
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 35 Madam Acting Chairman, in terms of this bus review, I'm not certain just exactly
how it will go in terms of that. But I am fascinated by the barrage of questions
from the Labor Party around public transport. It's good to see that they're finally
taking some interest in this subject matter. It's something which they have
spoken long about over the years but something for which they have done very
little in terms of their real action on the ground.
I state that, Madam Acting Chairman, because I recall that I came to this place as
a cabinet member in 2004, my second time around in cabinet, there was just one
in three buses that even had air-conditioning in this subtropical climate of ours.
So, Madam Acting Chairman, it was for many people a no option in summer in
particular, people would jump into their cars because they knew by jumping into
a bus they were assured of having little comfort in our subtropical climate,
because of Labor's inability to air-condition any more than one bus in three at
that time. That speaks volumes from my point of view.
So walking to the bus was one thing, it was then the trip they had to encounter
under Labor administration then, Madam Acting Chairman, that became the real
issue for them. That was one of the reasons why we only say this eight per cent
growth from $44 million in 1991 to $48 million in 2004, a small percentage
against the very significant population growth of 20 per cent during that period
of time. So Councillor DICK the 400 metres is an aspiration that hasn't changed
in terms of this Council but we will wait and see in terms of what it means in
terms of the average walking distance, in terms of the new routes.
I suspect that there will not be a massive change in terms of the walking
distance. The greater issue is that of the intermodal transfers.
Acting Chairman:
Further questions? Councillor HOWARD.
Question 7
Councillor HOWARD:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chair. Madam Acting Chair, my question is to the
chairman of the Public and Active Transport Committee, Councillor MATIC.
Would you please outline the commitment that this administration has to
ensuring that our bus network is inclusive and accessible and are you aware of
any alternative approaches to making the network more accessible?
Acting Chairman:
Councillor MATIC.
Councillor MATIC:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman, I thank Councillor HOWARD for the
question. Madam Acting Chairman, this administration has clearly demonstrated
our commitment to ensuring that Council's bus network is both inclusive and
accessible. Again, Madam Acting Chairman, it's since 2008 that we can clearly
show an enormous amount of investment in this area which has provided huge
dividends. Brisbane's bus fleet is not only comfortable and safe but we are
meeting our commitment to making our buses more disability compliant. It's
through the leadership of LORD MAYOR Graham QUIRK that we have seen a
number of important announcements that are making this a reality, bringing this
administration into the next generation of DDA compliance and leading the way,
Madam Acting Chairman, above any other council, in fact many other levels of
government throughout Australia.
Why? Because we want to ensure that all people, regardless of ability can access
one of Council's buses. As at the end of February this year, Council's bus fleet
totalled 1256 buses. Now of these 1121 are wheelchair accessible. This
represents 89 per cent of the network. We are working towards our 100 per cent
commitment by 2016, Madam Acting Chairman. Now in line with the DDA
legislation, 55 per cent of this city's bus-stops are compliant with disability
standards. We are meeting our target of 90 per cent by 2017. We are spending
over $30 million over the next four years on bus-stop upgrades.
This administration plans to spend over $88 million over four years to upgrade
the city's bus and ferry stops. All upgrades under the bus-stop DDA program will
be compliant with the standards that are set, Madam Acting Chairman, through
the commission, through the legislation and the standards set by Standards
Australia. Council has been undertaking a dedicated program to upgrade bus[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 36 stops and we have done that in consultation with a number of key stakeholder
groups across the community in the disability area.
Now, Madam Acting Chairman, approximately 1400 sites were upgraded with a
55 per cent DDA compliance since July last year. All of these, Madam Acting
Chairman, have been through the hard work and commitment of our Council
officers in consultation with those stakeholders, Madam Acting Chairman, to
make sure that we are delivering like never before in this space. Now examples,
Madam Acting Chairman, are across our city and we can clearly see the benefits
of that.
Madam Acting Chairman, the kind of things that we are seeing are the concrete
waiting areas, boarding points of adequate size and level, tactile ground service
indicators to assist the visually impaired to locate the bus-stop, repositioning of
the bus seating of shelters to ensure there is adequate waiting area for wheelchair
and pram users, access paths-ramps between footpaths and boarding points.
These are the kind of real changes to the infrastructure that this side of the
chamber is committed to and has the money to support.
But in respect to as Councillor HOWARD was saying as the Chair am I aware of
an alternative approach, well the only other alternative approach I'm aware of,
Madam Acting Chairman, is that of the ALP. Their approach was to do nothing.
Madam Acting Chairman, just one third of buses under their administration
leadership were wheelchair accessible in 2004. Even though they clearly had a
policy in place which they had never followed up on, which they'd never
implemented.
Madam Acting Chairman, even as recently as our last Council election we saw
the Lord Mayoral candidate for the ALP make an announcement about buses and
what was his contribution? Eighteen million dollars, Madam Acting Chairman,
only $18 million to address the issues of DDA compliance of our bus-stops
across the city. Madam Acting Chairman, that clearly shows a failure to
understand the significance of the amount of work that is required. Madam
Acting Chairman, when you've got a $30 million investment going on as we do
on this side of the chamber through the LORD MAYOR's commitment over four
years, you can clearly see the kind of levels of money and support that is needed
to do these things.
But this side of the chamber is committed to that process, Madam Acting
Chairman. Those opposite just don't get it. Those opposite, Madam Acting
Chairman, talk the talk but aren’t prepared to make the commitment to all of
Brisbane's residents to address the accessibility issues and to build a better
network for everyone.
Acting Chairman:
Further questions? Councillor JOHNSTON.
Question 8
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Yes thank you, Madam Acting Chairman. My question is to the LORD
MAYOR. LORD MAYOR there is one Keep Quiet sign directed at cyclists on
Mount Ommaney Drive. LORD MAYOR, could you please advise the budget
part, the name of the program and the program number under which this sign has
been funded?
LORD MAYOR:
Well thank you Councillor JOHNSTON for the question. I suspect that it's
schedule 2009 which would be the general amenity section under which it would
be funded. I just want to make some comments though given that Councillor
JOHNSTON has asked a question about cyclists. Madam Acting Chairman, we
live in a city and in a city everybody has to consider one another's position.
Everybody has to take into account a bit of give and take in relation to our
situation. That's the nature of urban living. Urban living involves people having
cars, it involves people having dogs that might occasionally bark, it involves
people that sometimes ride bikes.
I would have to say that I have previously in radio interviews asked people who
do ride bikes early in the morning to cooperate by respecting the fact that people
also sleep early in the morning. People are entitled to ride bikes early in the
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 37 morning and we certainly encourage an active and healthy lifestyle in our city.
Full marks to them I'm not out there I have to say. Full marks to them for getting
out there early in the morning. But it is important that we make sure that we
don't have to reach a point of reverting to signage asking cyclists to keep their
voices down at 5:30 or 6am in the morning. It is a reflection—
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Point of order, Madam Acting Chairman.
Acting Chairman:
Point of order against you LORD MAYOR. Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
I appreciate the LORD MAYOR's answer. I would just ask, Madam Acting
Chairman, that he confirms that the schedule he's referred to is the right one. He
did say he thinks it's that and I just ask as part of the answer that he provide that
budget program name and number. If he can confirm that either now or at a later
point, Madam Acting Chairman, in answer to the question.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON, the LORD MAYOR still has a bit of time in his
response. I will let him see what he can provide you.
LORD MAYOR:
Yes thanks very much, Madam Acting Chairman. Madam Acting Chairman, so
again I just ask that cyclists that if they are out in numbers in the early morning,
do acknowledge that there are other parts of our society who perhaps don't have
that exuberance and enthusiasm for early morning workouts as they do. I ask that
they ensure that they respect those who are trying to sleep at that time. Again as I
said urban living is all about give and take but it is a case of us respecting the
fact that there are others who may not, as I say, be up and about in the early
hours of the morning.
It is an issue which is I think tending to grown and emerge in our city in that
there are more and more cyclists that are utilising our city streets. That's a good
thing. We certainly don't want to do anything to discourage cyclists from
undertaking that early morning exercise. But it is as I say a case of behaviour.
It's a case of behaviour of motorists respecting cyclists also have a right in terms
of the road network. It's a case of cyclists also respecting not only people
sleeping Councillor JOHNSTON but also pedestrians, making sure that there is
this sense of consideration that does apply.
If you like it comes down to an unwritten etiquette that ought to exist, a common
decency that ought to exist. Common sense that ought to exist—
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Point of order, Madam Acting Chairman.
Acting Chairman:
Point of order Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
I agree with everything the LORD MAYOR is saying, Madam Acting Chairman,
but again my question was about the budget program name and number.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON, I have said that the LORD MAYOR has five minutes to
respond to your question, and he is doing so and he will provide the information
he is able to in the course of his answer. LORD MAYOR.
LORD MAYOR:
Yes so, Madam Acting Chairman, I mean that's the reality. So what we don't
want to see naturally is a proliferation of signage I would say across the city. I
mean that's not going to serve any great purpose at all to do that. I think that
would be self-defeating to do it. But again we have budgets, Madam Acting
Chairman, we have budgets, that's the reality. We don't have specific budgets if
that's what Councillor JOHNSTON is trying to get at for putting up signs for
cyclists asking them to be quiet. But I just make the point—
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Point of order, Madam Acting Chairman.
Acting Chairman:
Point of order Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Madam Acting Chairman, my question was about the sign on Mount Ommaney
Drive. I asked what program budget name and number that sign was funded
under, Madam Acting Chairman. So it's about a particular sign on Mount
Ommaney Drive which it says Keep Quiet Cyclists and I'd appreciate an answer
to that question, Madam Acting Chairman.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 38 Acting Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON as I have said previously, the LORD MAYOR has five
minutes to answer. He still has over a minute left. He is going to provide you the
appropriate answer that he is able to at this point in time. LORD MAYOR.
LORD MAYOR:
Yes thanks very much, Madam Acting Chairman. Look again, Madam Acting
Chairman, I don't claim to be across every single sign that gets put up in this
city. I don't know that really anybody, well maybe one person, but I don't think
too many people in this chamber would expect me to be across every single
thing that occurs in Brisbane. But, Madam Acting Chairman, I've given my best
understanding of what happens in respect to signage. Generally we have a
general amenity fund that of course deals with a whole range of traffic based
issues, Madam Acting Chairman.
It involves everything from traffic signage right through and so my
understanding, and correct me if I'm wrong Finance Chair, I think it's schedule
number 209, a general amenities schedule is the one that it would relate to.
Acting Chairman:
Thank you LORD MAYOR. Further questions? Councillor MARX.
Question 9
Councillor MARX:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman. My question is to the chairman of
Finance, Economic Development and Administration Committee, Councillor
SIMMONDS. Would you please outline the record level in investment that this
administration has directed into providing Brisbane with Australia's most
modern and efficient bus fleet and are you aware of any alternative approaches
to providing a modern and efficient fleet?
Acting Chairman:
Councillor SIMMONDS.
Councillor SIMMONDS:
Thank you very much, Madam Acting Chairman, and thank you also to
Councillor MARX for the question because this administration has a record of
significantly investing in public transport. You noticed earlier through the debate
earlier today that we are passionate about public transport. That passion reflects
itself in the record investment that we have put into it since 2008. We're
passionate about it and we're willing to invest in it because it's part of our
comprehensive strategy to get Brisbane moving again. It goes hand in hand with
the efforts that we're doing in terms of active transport and upgrading the local
road network and is just important as those features.
Madam Acting Chairman, I can quite confidently say that this administration
since 2008 has invested more in public transport than any administration before
it, Madam Acting Chairman, and that includes the administrations that the
councillors opposite, the Labor councillors, were a part of. Madam Acting
Chairman, haven't we dragged them kicking and screaming over the years?
Madam Acting Chairman, they opposed new bus depots, they've opposed
upgrades to public transport terminals, CityCat terminals. They told us that we
couldn't build 500 buses. They told us that the CityGlider wouldn't work, Madam
Acting Chairman, and thank goodness we didn't listen to them on any occasion.
Thank goodness for the people of Brisbane and the public transport system in
this city and now they expect us to believe that they are suddenly converted to
public transport. I am not convinced. Personally I think it is more likely for me
to wake up tomorrow and decide to be Catholic than it is, that these people have
decided to support public transport now after all these years. Not that there's
anything wrong with Catholics, I wouldn't turn it down if they offered me to be
pope but frankly it's something that is either, like being Catholic, is something
that's either in your blood or it's not.
Quite simply supporting public transport is in our blood and in the LNP's blood,
Madam Acting Chairman. It is not when it comes to the Labor councillors
opposite. The State Government's bus review certainly demonstrates how far
Brisbane City Council has come in supporting public transport. It notes in the
bus review, Council's contribution of $73 million in CSO funding in the 20122013 year alone, significant, significant funding up from some $29 million under
the Labor councillors opposite.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 39 Compare that to the next highest contributor from a Council point of view are
the Gold Coast who have put in $6.38 million, combine the contribution of the
other councils in the South East Queensland area amount to $7.564 million not
even impacting on compared to what Brisbane City Council has put in. All up
Brisbane ratepayers contributes some $383 per ratepayer for public transport,
Madam Acting Chairman. On top of this significant CSO the investment that we
have put into vital public transport infrastructure like the new depots that have
helped deliver and the bus build facility that has helped deliver the 500 new
buses and 360 this term.
The new CityGlider that we have gone in 50-50 with the state government and of
course the new Maroon CityGlider which has commenced currently. Madam
Acting Chairman, our record financial contribution has allowed us to get to a
position where we've gone from less than a third of the buses air-conditioned to
100 per cent of the fleet. As previous councillors have noted, we're now doing
the same thing in terms of accessibility. This is why we have to take Labor's
miraculous conversion to supporting public transport with a grain of salt because
we begged them, we begged them a few years ago to join us in railing against the
previous state Labor Government's 15 per cent fare hike and they couldn't bring
themselves to do it.
They knew that their Labor mates in George Street were facing election and they
couldn't bring themselves to oppose them and stick up for the people of
Brisbane. Well we will stick up for the people of Brisbane. As the LORD
MAYOR and other councillors have outlined today, we will be standing up and
demonstrating where we think this current State Government review is flawed.
But Councillor MARX you asked about alternative approaches and a simple
answer is this. The Labor councillors here today when they rail against the
services that may be lost under this review, quite simply they couldn't have
afforded those services if they had been in administration.
Quite simply they wouldn't have had the buses to put them on in the first place if
they were in administration, given that they could only build 60 buses in a five
year period. It is only because of this administration and its commitment to
public transport that we are where we are today. When you consider our total
public transport spend we are over double, they were half of what we have spent,
Madam Acting Chairman, that we spend every year in public transport.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor SIMMONDS, your time has expired. That ends Question Time.
CONSIDERATION OF COMMITTEE REPORTS:
ESTABLISHMENT AND COORDINATION COMMITTEE
The Right Honourable the LORD MAYOR (Councillor Graham QUIRK), Chairman of the Establishment and
Coordination Committee, moved, seconded by the DEPUTY MAYOR (Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER), that
the report of the meeting of that Committee held on 4 March 2013, be adopted.
LORD MAYOR:
Yes thanks very much, Madam Acting Chairman. Before coming to the report
itself, there are a number of matters I'd like to report on. Firstly, Madam Acting
Chairman, this morning I launched a guide to hotel investment in Brisbane. This
is a piece of work, Madam Acting Chairman, which is being undertaken jointly
between the Brisbane Marketing Group and that of the State Government. It's
about making sure that we provide if you like a prospectus around investing in
hotels.
One of the important aspects of that report, Madam Acting Chairman, was the
indication of the numbers of hotel rooms that we will require into the future, if
we are to sustain the sort of growth that we are seeing in both the business
meetings and conference markets. We've had a 25 per cent growth in that market
over the last year. So it is that we know from all of the projections that we're
going to need in the order of 299 to 449 beds a year over the coming 10 year
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 40 period. That is a significant challenge, a significant challenge because we know
that hotel developments are not easy developments to get up and going.
That's why about a year and a half ago I put on the table that opportunity for
people interested in hotel—
Acting Chairman:
Just a moment please LORD MAYOR. Councillor JOHNSTON what are those
files behind Councillor COOPER that you're accessing?
Acting Chairman:
Okay alright. Thank you, I was just checking because they are obviously sitting
behind Councillor COOPER. LORD MAYOR.
LORD MAYOR:
Thanks, Madam Acting Chairman. So, Madam Acting Chairman, we will
obviously continue to do all that we can to make sure that we get additional hotel
sites up and running. It's not easy; it's not easy to make hotels work both in terms
of the construction and operational aspects. But we will continue to work
diligently towards that.
We are also, Madam Acting Chairman, last week I was privileged to give the
SES National Emergency Award medals to a significant number of SES personal
in our city. There were 72 in attendance, a total of 90 were eligible, those medals
will be given to the other members of our SES who could not be there on the
night. This is Federal Government award, it is a significant award and it's given
for great service provided by those SES personnel.
Madam Acting Chairman, also on the weekend we launched the Digital Brisbane
Strategy and this is a program which will see an engagement, again driven
through Brisbane Marketing, our agents for action in terms of economic
development, with that of the business community. It's about engaging to make
sure that they are using every opportunity to take up options in the digital space.
So that is a program which has a clear agenda in terms of the strategy. It has
clear objectives of what it's trying to achieve in regards to linking with business,
linking with other start-ups around this city of ours, Madam Acting Chairman,
giving them encouragement and incentives to further develop their products and
create jobs through that process.
Also 14 to 17 March will see the World's Greatest Shave; this is the Leukaemia
Foundation; they've now raised a total of $120 million since 1998. It has been an
extraordinary phenomenon the World's Greatest Shave Day. So it is, Madam
Acting Chairman, that that will be again I'm sure supported by many people
throughout this city who will take the plunge and shave their heads for that
particular great fundraising effort. My hat goes off to them and perhaps my hat
should go onto their heads after they've undertaken that particular task.
Madam Acting Chairman, I'll move to the report itself but firstly I just wanted to
indicate that there's been other new draft City Plan consultation sessions held
over the last week. We've seen Westfield Chermside Shopping Centre, a number
of kiosks held there during the last week. We've also had the Brisbane Square
Library as a focal point as well as the Bracken Ridge Plaza. So, Madam Acting
Chairman, they have been opportunities, a total of seven opportunities there in
all for people to get out and learn more about the plan, and to ask planners any
questions they may have relative to their property or to the city as a whole.
The Items before us today are firstly Item A is a resumption, Madam Acting
Chairman, required for a black spot project on the corner of Lutwyche Road and
Constitution Road, an intersection upgrade. There have been 33 reported
accidents at this intersection including seven hospitalisations and a further 12
requiring medical treatment over the last five year period. I thank the Federal
Government for their contribution to this program and to the important works of
this particular intersection upgrade.
We are as a result, needing to resume land which is leased by Officeworks
Superstores Proprietary Limited. It is a piece of land which I believe is owned by
the state government but it's actually leased. So it is that we have to undertake
that resumption process through the current lessee, Officeworks Superstores. So
it's for the chamber's consideration.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 41 Item B, Madam Acting Chairman, is the Brisbane Flood Smart Future Strategy
2012-2031. This is a strategy which of course recognises that we are a city which
does flood. We have a history of flood events. It's a fact of life living on a river,
that, coupled with the fact that we don't know the nature of any future event is
one where we need to be prepared, where we need to do what we can in terms of
building our flood resilience as best as we possibly can. To that extent there's
been some major steps forward taken from the LORD MAYOR's Taskforce on
Suburban Flooding.
This was a taskforce of course which was established by former Lord Mayor
Newman in 2005 and out of that came a number of very significant actions.
These are for example the Flood Plain map where we've seen over 150,000
Flood Plain maps downloaded in 2011 alone. The Early Warning Alert Service,
we've got over 60,000 people now engaged in that particular service free of
charge again to those residents. The Brisbane Community Response of course it
makes reference to that, the Mud Army that we saw so active in January 2011 is
recognised within this report.
We also talk about the Voluntary Home Purchase Scheme, something again that
was only introduced in 2006 as something where there have been 73 properties
now purchased under that scheme. Backflow prevention devices are fairly new
arrivals, not new in the sense that there were many backflow prevention devices
in the city, but the new wave of backflow prevention devices resulting from the
Max Winders & Associates report and other subsequent reports, Madam Acting
Chairman, which see us on a program of delivering backflow devices.
Floodwise Property Reports, these are reports, free reports to householders to
look at the various aspects of flooding relative to their individual properties.
Then of course we have the Brisbane Ready for Summer Campaign which we
have actively participated in to make sure that people do all the things necessary
to ensure that they are ready for what the summer storm season may throw at us
as a community.
This particular strategy, Madam Acting Chairman, is outlined in six parts. It
covers the strategic outcomes firstly around a risk based approach to flood
management. There is a section which relates to an integrated and adaptive
approach to dealing with flooding. We'll look at a smart planning and building
approach, we look at an educated and resilient community, making sure that
people are aware of what they need to do within our subtropical environment.
We look at a world class response and recovery once an event has occurred. We
also look at this strategic report about the well maintained and improved
structural assets that we need in dealing with flood events and indeed in building
resilience for our city. Happy to move the report.
Acting Chairman:
Thank you. Further debate? Councillor ABRAHAMS.
Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chair. Madam Acting Chair, I would like to
comment on the policy Brisbane Flood Smart Future Strategy 2012-2031.
Madam Acting Chair, this policy is 14 pages long. If you exclude the photos, it
is a seven page document. If you then exclude the message from the LORD
MAYOR and the history, it comes down to a five page document. If you then
exclude what has been done, you're left with four pages of strategy.
Madam Acting Chair, within that strategy the most significant change for where
this city has been, a change when this city has had one severe flood and one
severe storm event that threatened flooding that whole time in just two years,
this strategy states under one of the principles and I will read, that it is achieving
balanced social economic and environmental objectives, promoting responsible
development of this city appropriate to risk of flooding.
Then it continues we need flood plains for a whole range of reasons so we need
to achieve a balance of managing these areas. Economic growth is key to
Brisbane's future and that growth needs to be based on innovative planning and
sound flood risk management to protect the investment in future development.
The final paragraph, we are confident that smart growth can contribute to good
outcomes.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 42 Madam Acting Chair, within that stated objective of social economic
environment only the economic that being development was even mentioned.
There was no suggestion of social benefit nor economic benefit, even though that
was the appropriate heading for it. Madam Acting Chair, when I proceed to
strategy three which is smart development the document is very clear. The first
dot point of the LNP's approach is to locate the right land use in the right place
by considering how development can be designed and sited to tolerate natural
hazards for a full range of flood events.
The right development and the right place so that it can be flooded. That's
development on flood plains. That is saying we are a city that has been flooded
but in this policy we are turning our back on the first recommendation of the
LORD MAYOR's Flood Taskforce and that was to protect the waterway
corridors and not to prevent development on the waterway corridors. But here
we are in this policy after two years of flood and heavy rains giving the green
light to the development. The only thing they have to do is dot point number
three to make sure that the development is designed and constructed to be more
resilient to flooding.
Development at any cost, it's the developer's who pay the cost and we're only
interested in a little bit and the little bit of resilience designing. I hope LORD
MAYOR you're not leaving the chamber because this is the biggest turnaround
we have had in terms of flood management in our city. If you in fact look at
what the new City Plan is saying, it's got five or six categories on what the flood
mapping is about. Those categories are actually talking about the development
within, I'm just getting the provisions up. Of those provisions there are five and
of those five provisions in the new City Plan all of them relate to fast moving
water, deep and moderate fast moving water, very deep or very fast moving
water.
In those categories under those specifications the City Plan is enabling
development, is enabling development with the words of those of risk
assessment that say don't develop. That is what we've said in the past and even
so we are [unclear] the delay of new developments in our city. This plan also
refers to a golf course rather than a retirement village on a flood plain. Now the
only retirement village I can think is one that I actually supported because I
support retirement villages and that is the one at Cansdale Street, Yeronga.
Our flood studies said that that building would not flood. In 2011 it was flooded
and the residents on that were not able to go back into that building for months.
So our existing flood studies don't work, don't deliver, don't protect. Yet we're
saying in this strategy don't worry, we're giving you a greener light than you've
got now to develop on our flood plains. This is a disgrace. As well as that we
know that the Voluntary Home Purchase Scheme has been cut in half. It's not
referred as a strategy in here that we're looking after just something that has been
done in that category.
As well as that we know the CityPlan is increasing the amount of fill as of right
and it doesn’t distinguish whether that is in a floodplain or not and as well as
that, this strategy does not bring forward the backflow valves, does not bring—
they’ve still got the same timeframe and questionably about how many situations
are they going to be applied and yet just one month ago many Brisbane residents
would have liked to have thought they had a backflow valve to support them.
This strategy is a disgrace. This strategy is not balanced. It is not protecting the
residents of our city. It is even more laissez-faire for the development than
anything has gone before and I would just like the other side of the chamber to
be honest because every time they get up and talk about all the terrible things
that previous LNP governments and Labor governments have done in our city,
they should reflect today they are doing more to achieve development in the
flooding than has ever been written down in paper in plans in our city.
Acting Chairman:
Further debate? Councillor HOWARD?
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 43 Councillor HOWARD:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman. I rise to speak to the Establishment and
Coordination Report clause A regarding completion of the land resumptions
along Lutwyche Road for the Constitution Road intersection upgrade.
I’m pleased to report, Madam Acting Chairman, that this important arterial road
safety project is well on the way to being delivered. Locally our administration
understands that the growth of our inner northern suburbs presents challenges for
infrastructure. That’s why I’m so committed to ensuring funding for
infrastructure flows to the suburbs in Central Ward.
Residents in Windsor are looking forward to the increased safety measures that
this investment will bring to the area and Council has made every effort to
accommodate the needs of local residents and businesses, as well as commuters
in the design of the project. Safety is important to me and to my residents so I’m
pleased to hear that the project continues as a result of this land resumption.
As the LORD MAYOR said, Madam Acting Chairman, this intersection is a
recognised accident black spot. In the five years up to 2008 33 accidents were
reported at the intersection, including seven hospitalisations and a further 12
requiring medical treatments. Vehicles turning right from Lutwyche Road into
Officeworks accounted for 18 of these accidents. This $1.5 million project will
address the accidents we have seen in the area by creating a signalised right turn
from Lutwyche Road into Constitution Road, a signalised left turn from
Constitution Road into Lutwyche Road, a signalised pedestrian crossing on
Constitution Road, an extended right turn pocket on Lutwyche Road into
Constitution Road for queuing vehicles, banning the right turn to and from the
Officeworks driveway via a traffic island on Lutwyche Road and banning the
right turn from Constitution Road to Lutwyche Road.
It is this last point that is very important for motorists in and around our local
suburbs of Windsor, Madam Acting Chairman. During design it was determined
that it’s not possible to maintain the right turn out of Constitution Road. If the
right turn was allowed it would encourage more traffic to use Constitution Road
as an alternate to Macau Street to access Lutwyche Road. This would not be
consistent with Constitution Road’s status as a local road. The current volume of
right turning traffic is considered to be relatively low and local detours are
available for Officeworks’ customers and local residents.
I am very glad, Madam Acting Chairman, that this is a strategic partnership
between governments. So can I commend the work of our Federal Member,
Teresa Gambaro in this regard. Teresa and I understand we must plan for the
future and invest strategically in new and innovative infrastructure funding
pathways and partnerships. I look forward to continuing to work with her and
our respective officers to deliver this project.
Acting Chairman:
Further debate? Councillor JOHNSTON?
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Yes, Madam Deputy Chairman. I rise to speak on Item B, Madam Chairman.
I have to say I’m really disappointed with the document that the LORD MAYOR
has put forward today called Brisbane’s FloodSmart Future Strategy 2012-2031.
This is a document that’s supposed to be I guess the pinnacle of this Council’s
position on flood management, flood recovery and the key piece of
documentation that draws together the work that this Council does.
This document is not worth the paper it’s printed on. I think it’s an appalling—
document that’s full of motherhood statements, that this Council professes to
support but in action does not and I intend to direct my debate today to where
those problems exist in this flimsy—flimsy—document the LORD MAYOR has
put forward.
I mean even the look of it, as Councillor ABRAHAMS was saying, is it’s a
glossy brochure with lots of photos. Let’s not be upfront and have a proper
discussion with residents about flooding; let’s put together a nice glossy
document with lots of photos that makes people feel good but ignore the serious
issues that are bedevilling our suburbs over this wet season.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 44 Now the first issue of concern to me was the LORD MAYOR’s message and
here’s the quote—the quote from the LORD MAYOR—‘This strategy will assist
us to be better prepared for and recover more quickly from flooding.’
I’m not certain how this strategy will do that when this LORD MAYOR himself
admits that basic warning signage that he promised in his flood action plan
hasn’t been delivered in our suburbs. So if we can’t even get some warning signs
into suburban streets that flood three or four times a year, what hope do we have
of getting basic information out to residents.
Well this LORD MAYOR, you heard him here just a few weeks ago said oops
sorry, even though I told people I’d done this, I haven’t really done it and that’s
an embarrassment, Madam Chairman. Here he says yes we’re giving residents
more information so they can be better informed. Not out my way. Those
projects have been cut and the LORD MAYOR didn’t even have the guts to hop
up and publicly say it until I asked him three questions about the matter in this
place. So you can’t believe anything the LORD MAYOR says.
Now the next interesting part is in page nine and what is flood risk management
and I have to put this one into the record. This has got to be the best statement
I’ve ever heard in my entire life. Everyone accepts that for land that experiences
frequent and fast-flowing flooding a golf course would be a more appropriate
use than a nursing home. This involves assessment of flood risk. Now isn’t that
wonderful. This leaves people with the idea that this Council considers open
spaces to be a suitable sort of development in known flooding areas, when in
reality approves week after week after week buildings in known waterway
corridors, buildings in known overland-flow paths, buildings in areas where it
knows it floods and it’s done that week after week after week, both before the
January 2011 floods and after.
So, Madam Chairman, this is a facetious statement. It’s a ridiculous statement.
Everyone accepts; right, good. This Council doesn’t appear to get it. It says
everyone accepts that a golf course would be better than a nursing home. Well
not according to what this Council does in practise. This LORD MAYOR can
talk the talk but he cannot walk the walk when it comes to making sure that we
have the right sort of building going into areas that are known to flood. It’s not
happening. It’s clear that it’s not happening out in our area.
Now that was a good one, I enjoyed that. That was almost my favourite
statement and I know Councillor ABRAHAMS you admired that statement as
well. It’s a good one isn’t it? It’s condescending quite frankly. I don’t know who
actually wrote this document but that’s the most condescending statement I have
ever heard and I think my residents would be very upset after 5000 of their
homes flooded to hear a statement like everyone accepts that a golf course would
be better than a nursing home. Well Council, LORD MAYOR, get on and do it.
Stop approving developments in known flooding areas as you are continuing to
do.
There are three statements in here and again it comes back to this idea that we’re
providing more information to people. Well certainly that’s not happening as far
as I can see. I admit there were some good things that we did during the
Australian Day event in terms of letting people know about streets that may
flood. Those forecasts were well out, but at least we had the information and
they could make informed choices.
But, Madam Chairman, we need more standardised information and we need it
in a practical way. Residents need to know how high the water will go over their
roads, they need to know when they shouldn’t cross those roads and they need
the signage the LORD MAYOR promised he would deliver as part of the
independent Council review. It was a recommendation of that review. The
LORD MAYOR remember gave it a big tick and said completed. Where is it,
it’s in here somewhere. I’ll find it. Completed—a big red stamp. Well I don’t
think so, Madam Chairman, it’s clearly not true.
Now strategic outcome number three—our approach and Councillor
ABRAHAMS I noted exactly the same thing—locate the right land use in the
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 45 right place by considering how development can be designed and sited to
tolerate natural hazards for a full range of flood events. Let’s not actually think
about whether it’s the right thing to build. Let’s just make sure we kind of build
it in a way where it won’t flood or like in the case of the South Regional
Business Centre, make sure they’ve got dinghies so they can row themselves out.
That’s how this Council thinks that they can manage flood risk at Yeerongpilly.
It’s okay because if they’ve got a boat they can row themselves out. It’s not on.
It’s not on and what we know is that the Queensland Flood Royal Commission
specifically made recommendations about the inappropriate use of fill and we
know that this Council is ignoring those recommendations and it is jacking up
the levels of fill in residential areas and in industrial areas as part of its new
CityPlan. It is shocking, shocking behaviour by this LORD MAYOR to ignore a
Royal Commission’s recommendations.
Now strategic outcome number four also a gem. Our approach; help residents
and business to be resilient and prepare for flooding by providing simple
accessible and fit for purpose flood information. Well again, let’s put some signs
up. We told people we were going to do it. The independent review said we
should do it. Did we do it? No we did not. This LORD MAYOR couldn’t be
bothered and after three questions in this place he just finally confessed. If you
can’t do a basic thing like put up a few warning signs LORD MAYOR I think
you should pack up and go home. I mean I think you might be cruising towards
retirement as it is, but that’s a shocker. To stand up and say—yes he’s laughing,
that’s it. God help us who we’ll get—COOPER will be trying—but anyway what
I would say is we need these signs. If you’re talking about simple accessible and
fit for purpose flood information, some signage would be a good thing. A little
bit of signage. I’m not asking for things that we haven’t actually been promised.
I’m simply asking for things that the LORD MAYOR has said have been
completed and we know have not been.
Finally strategic outcome six—this is talking about infrastructure and the
importance of maintaining and investing in flood mitigation assets. This LORD
MAYOR says that infrastructure of $2.5 billion is maintained by Council and to
make sure we don’t see even more small floods passing under our roads. As the
city grows new assets will be needed to keep pace with this growth and existing
assets will need to be maintained. Well we know because I’ve been banging on
about it for months now—drainage is not being delivered in the suburbs in my
area. We know that this Council is aware that drainage in Yeronga and Fairfield
particularly they knew 10 years ago that the drainage was inadequate and yet we
still have to wait another 20 years before this LORD MAYOR will invest in the
drainage upgrades that the Council said 20 years ago were essential. That is not,
in my view, maintaining existing assets. That just shows a lack of understanding,
a lack of awareness and the lack of the impact of flooding on local residents.
We also know that this LORD MAYOR has refused—we got this out of him in
the City Plan debate—he refused to fund 20 odd backflow valves because he
said no we we’re only going to fund the 80 per cent—the backflow valves that
cover 80 per cent of Brisbane. The other 20 per cent of Brisbane people—no—
you don’t deserve a backflow valve. Fully one-fifth of the suburbs of Brisbane
where backflow valves have been shown by an independent technical report by
an engineer—so it’s not just me making it up or a Council officer making it up,
it’s a qualified engineer who has asked for his advice. He said yes put them in all
of these areas and the LORD MAYOR cherry-picked the ones that he thought
would be best and he has ignored 20 per cent of all of the areas that would
benefit from backflow values and guess what, that includes Tennyson, that
includes Yeronga and that includes Fairfield.
Their drainage has been delayed, it’s on the never-never list for another 20 years
and their backflow valves aren’t even listed on the priority infrastructure plan.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON your time has expired. Further debate? Councillor
BOURKE?
Councillor BOURKE:
Good thanks very much, Madam Chairman. I just rise to enter the debate on Item
B this evening of Brisbane’s FloodSmart Future Strategy and unlike the previous
two speakers on that side, I want to start by actually congratulating the officers
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 46 and thanking them for their hard work because once again the Council officers
are working hard as they always do to continue to evolve, develop and grow this
Council’s response to flooding in the city. Not just river flooding which
apparently is the only type of flooding that Councillor ABRAHAMS thinks the
city experiences, but also other types of flooding like tidal, storm surge and
creek flooding of course, Madam Acting Chairman.
It was disappointing to hear the comments from those opposite, very
disappointing. I for one think that this document actually encapsulates and
encompasses the whole of the response that Council has bringing together the
various different elements from across all of the branches how we as a council
deal, plan and help to mitigate and respond and recover from flooding of all
different sorts across the whole of the city. Cherry-picking out statements and
cherry-picking out comments to use for your own political purposes does no one
any benefit when it comes to trying to read and understand this document,
Madam Acting Chairman, and it’s a shame that those opposite have chosen that
tact when it comes to trying to understand this document.
One of the key things that we have to understand when we’re dealing with
flooding—and they can mock and laugh and carry on over there, Madam
Chairman, but one of the key things we have to understand when it comes to
flooding is we have to try and make the message and make the examples that we
use as easy to understand as possible. Whilst Councillor ABRAHAMS thinks
that picking out the example around a golf course versus a nursing home on a
block of land that floods quite often might be a very simplistic view, it’s
something that people can understand. It’s something that the general public can
understand that that is not an appropriate use for a block of land that suffers
frequent and high volume flooding. I would have thought it was quite an apt
example of an appropriate use versus a non-appropriate use.
Madam Chairman, we have moved since 2011 to a flood risk management
strategy. Instead of just a flood management strategy it is a flood risk
management strategy. It is much broader, it is much more in-depth, it is much
more in detail about what type of flooding, how the flooding occurs, what is the
volume, what is the velocity, how deep does the water get and how does it affect
and how can you mitigate through the built form and through the infrastructure
form that type of flooding to help alleviate the problems for the residents but
also deal with the flooding in a safe way.
So the six strategic outcomes go through and outline clearly how we as a
council, as one council through all of the branches, are able to deal with this
particular problem. For Councillor ABRAHAMS to stand up and start picking
through various parts of the plan trying to pick out little bits and pieces, Madam
Chairman, I have to correct the record on some of the things she said.
Backflow devices—you know, what the sad history of backflow devices is,
Madam Chairman? For 13 years the Australian Labor Party, the great champions
of backflow devices, I remember the former councillor, Councillor Hinchliffe,
standing up in this place singing the praises of backflow devices. How much did
they commit at the Council elections in April last year? Zip, zero, zilch. Madam
Chairman, the only people who had a commitment to delivering backflow
devices was the LNP administration under LORD MAYOR Graham Quirk and
we have gotten on with the job of delivering them.
So they can sit on the sidelines and criticise and harp and be the wishes they
could haves, the would haves, the should haves, but, Madam Chairman, when it
comes to actually getting on with the job and delivering and standing up for the
people of Brisbane and dealing with the issues, they are found wanting once
again.
Madam Chairman, Voluntary Home Purchase Scheme—I’m surprised
Councillor GRIFFITHS didn’t get up and deliver his stock speech about this. We
are the ones who implemented the Voluntary Home Purchase Scheme. The
LORD MAYOR put up the money in the wake of the 2011 floods. He doubled it
from $5 million to $10 million to buy more homes that had flooded or were at
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 47 risk of flooding and our commitment remains to deliver the Voluntary Home
Purchase Scheme.
I never saw in the 13 years that the Labor Party were in power in this place them
putting money on the table to go and buy people’s homes like that. No because
it’s too hard a decision and they could never do it because—
Councillors interjecting.
Acting Chairman:
Order.
Councillor BOURKE:
—what did the Labor Party do when they were in power? We remember the
newspaper stories, reports they refused to release. They buried their heads in the
sand. City Hall keeps facts from residents. The truth about flooding in the city,
Madam Chairman, comes down to this, that Administration under the former
Lord Mayor Campbell Newman and now under LORD MAYOR Quirk has been
more proactive, more open and more transparent when it comes to flooding and
making that information available to the residents of the city of Brisbane than
any administration in the past history of the city. That’s why one million people
have downloaded a Floodwise Property Report. That’s why we have our
Floodwise Flood Flag Property Maps. That’s why we have an early warning alert
system now. That’s why we have the Brisbane Ready for Summer Storms
system and information that goes out. Something that the Australian Labor Party
in all their years in power in this place buried their heads in the sand and they
never managed to actually deliver, never managed to inform the residents, but
have the hide to stand up in this place and criticise the hard work of the Council
officers and the hard work of the Council officers in bringing this document
forward and bringing the information together and putting it forward.
But so outraged—so outraged—they were by this document, Madam Chairman,
that between October 24 and December 12 they couldn’t even manage to put a
submission in. That’s how outraged and how disappointed Councillor
ABRAHAMS was. That’s how outraged and how disappointed Councillor
JOHNSTON was about this document. They could not bother to even put a
submission in. That’s how lazy they are, absolutely lazy. When the Brisbane
Airport Corporation can take the time to do it, when the Rivermouth Action
Group can take the time to put in a submission, the Property Council of Australia
can take the time to put in a submission and even the Embassy of the Kingdom
of the Netherlands, Madam Chairman—even our friends in Northern Europe can
take the time to pass on their wisdom and their wealth of knowledge when it
comes to dealing with flooding in urbanised areas. They can take the time but
those lazy councillors opposite who did nothing when they were in
administration, do nothing now when they’re in opposition but play stupid
political games, could not be bothered but choose to stand up in this place and
attack the hard work of the officers—and Councillor JOHNSTON is now
giggling. That’s the sort of regard that she has for the hard work of the Council
officers—
Acting Chairman:
Just a moment please Councillor BOURKE.
Order under section 186A of the City of Brisbane Act 2010 that disorderly conduct by Councillor
Nicole JOHNSTON be noted in the minutes
Acting Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON I have raised to your attention numerous times this
evening that calling out across this Chamber is not acceptable and would be
considered an act of disorder. Councillor JOHNSTON your conduct in this
Council meeting is disorderly and in accordance with section 186A of the City of
Brisbane Act I order that your disorderly conduct be noted in the minutes of this
meeting.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor BOURKE please continue.
Councillor BOURKE:
Madam Chairman, I think I’ve clearly outlined how those on the other side are
hypocritical in their approach to tackling the issue of flooding when it comes to
the City of Brisbane. Rest assured though, Madam Chairman, I can tell members
of the media, those in the gallery and for all the councillors on this side of the
Chamber, we won’t back away from our commitment, we won’t back away from
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 48 continuing to deliver the needed infrastructure, the needed information and the
hard work in terms of improving our flood models, our flood mapping, our flood
preparedness for the people of Brisbane and Brisbane’s FloodSmart Future
Strategy goes a long way to helping us continue to deliver on those goals on
those achievements for the people of Brisbane.
Further debate? I’ll now put the report.
Acting Chairman:
Motion put
Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of the report of the Establishment and
Coordination Committee was declared carried on the voices.
The report read as follows
ATTENDANCE:
The Right Honourable the Lord Mayor (Councillor Graham Quirk) (Chairman), Deputy Mayor
(Councillor Adrian Schrinner) (Deputy Chairman), and Councillors Krista Adams, Matthew Bourke,
Amanda Cooper, Peter Matic, David McLachlan and Julian Simmonds.
A
COMPLETION OF LAND RESUMPTIONS, LUTWYCHE
CONSTITUTION ROAD INTERSECTION UPGRADE
112/20/711/781
ROAD
–
508/2012-13
1.
The Executive Manager, City Projects Office, provides the information below.
2.
Council plans to upgrade the intersection of Lutwyche Road and Constitution Road,
Lutwyche. Officeworks has a large retail outlet at this intersection on land leased from the
Department of Education, Training and Employment.
3.
Council received funding under the Federal Government’s Black Spot Program to deliver
improvements that address the most problematic traffic locations. This intersection is a
recognised accident black spot. In the five years up to 2008, 33 accidents were reported at the
intersection, including seven hospitalisations and a further 12 requiring medical treatments.
Vehicles turning right from Lutwyche Road into Officeworks accounted for 18 of these
accidents.
4.
The road improvements cannot be completed within the existing road reserve. It is necessary
for Council to acquire a portion of the State land, leased to Officeworks by the Department of
Education, Training and Employment. The land is described in Schedule A in the
recommendation below and shown hatched on plan SUR120104-01, at Attachment B plan 1,
submitted on file.
5.
Meetings have been held with Department of Education, Training and Employment officers,
and they advised that the Department is willing to transfer the required land to Council
provided that Council first acquires part of the lease area from Officeworks.
6.
It will also be necessary to open Council land adjoining the intersection described in
Schedule B in the recommendation below as road. The land is shown hatched on plan
SUR120104-02, Attachment B plan 2, submitted on file.
7.
Key features of the preferred option for the intersection upgrade, outlined at Attachment C,
submitted on file, are:
partial signalisation of the intersection, including:
a signalised right turn from Lutwyche Road into Constitution Road
a signalised left turn from Constitution Road into Lutwyche Road
a signalised pedestrian crossing on Constitution Road.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 49 -
-
extended right turn pocket on Lutwyche Road into Constitution Road for queuing
vehicles
banned right turn to and from the Officeworks driveway via a traffic island on
Lutwyche Road
banned right turn from Constitution Road to Lutwyche Road.
8.
It is proposed that Council pursue completion of the formal resumption process for the part of
that lease as set out in Schedule A to ensure the timely acquisition of the required leased area.
9.
On completion of the formal resumption process, all interests in the resumed lease area are
converted into claims for compensation, pursuant to the provisions of the Acquisition of Land
Act 1967. Negotiations concerning compensation will continue concurrently with the formal
resumption process.
Customer impact
10.
In liaising with the affected property owners prior to and during the resumption process,
Council has provided an appropriate level of customer service. Key customer service
improvements on completion of construction will include improved traffic safety and
mobility.
Financial impact
11.
Funding is available in the 2012-13 budget.
12.
The Executive Manager therefore recommends as follows and the Committee agrees.
13.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL RESOLVE AS PER THE DRAFT RESOLUTION OUTLINED IN
ATTACHMENT A, hereunder.
Draft Resolution
Attachment A
RECOMMENDATION FOR THE COMPLETION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY LAND
RESUMPTIONS FOR LUTWYCHE ROAD / CONSTITUTION ROAD
INTERSECTION UPGRADE PROJECT
THAT:
1.
As:
(a)
on 25 September 2012, the Council in accordance with the provisions of the
Acquisition of Land Act 1967 issued Notices of Intention to Resume the
privately owned land set out and identified in Schedule A to this
recommendation
(b)
no objections were received from the lessee described in Schedule A
THEN COUNCIL IS OF THE OPINION THAT:
(i)
THE LEASE DESCRIBED IN SCHEDULE A IS REQUIRED FOR
ROAD PURPOSES; AND
(ii)
IT IS NECESSARY TO TAKE THE SAID LEASE.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 50 -
2.
As Council is of the opinion specified above, Council approves the making of an
application to the Minister for Natural Resources and Mines under the
provisions of the Acquisition of Land Act 1967 for the taking of those lands.
3.
Council also approves the opening of the land described in Schedule B as road; and:
(a)
Council will take such action as is necessary to formalise the road openings,
including the making of any application required under the
Sustainable Planning Act 2009 and the implementation of any approval that
results from those applications so far as is necessary to facilitate those road
openings
(b)
authority be granted for all of the land required for road purposes, or to be
subdivided for road purposes, to be cleared of improvements and dedicated as
road.
Schedule A
LESSEE
LOCATION
Officeworks
Superstores
Pty Ltd
A.C.N. 004 763 526
270 Lutwyche
Road, Windsor
REAL
PROPERTY
DESCRIPTION
AREA FOR
ROAD
PURPOSES
metre square
Lease 709631985 in
Lot 80 on
CP816128
137
PLAN
(Attachment B)
SUR120104-01
Schedule B
OWNER
LOCATION
Brisbane City Council
264 Lutwyche
Road, Windsor
REAL
PROPERTY
DESCRIPTION
LAND
REQUIRED
FOR ROAD
PURPOSES
metre square
Lot 1 on RP201631
53
PLAN
(Attachment B)
SUR120104-02
ADOPTED
B
APPROVAL OF THE FINAL BRISBANE’S FLOODSMART FUTURE
STRATEGY 2012-31
131/590/785/3
509/2012-13
14.
The Divisional Manager, City Planning and Sustainability Division, provides the information
below.
15.
On 11 July 2012, Council released an addendum to its January 2011 Flood Action Plan to
address recommendations arising from the final Queensland Floods Commission of Inquiry.
This included Action 2.12 “Develop a flood risk management strategy for Brisbane”, with a
delivery date of June 2013.
16.
Natural Environment, Water and Sustainability Branch, in conjunction with other divisions of
Council, developed a draft Brisbane’s FloodSmart Future Strategy 2012-2031 (draft
strategy).
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 51 -
17.
On 2 October 2012, the Establishment and Coordination Committee approved the release of
the draft strategy for public consultation. Public consultation occurred during a six-week
period from 24 October 2012 to 12 December 2012.
18.
A total of 17 responses were received, comprising submissions from:
members of the public
Brisbane Airport Corporation
Queensland Government departments including; Department of Transport and Main
Roads, Department of Premier and Cabinet, Department of Energy and Water Supply
and Department of Infrastructure and Planning
The Dutch Embassy in Canberra.
19.
The overall tone of responses was largely positive and supportive of the draft strategy. In
consideration of responses made, minor changes have been incorporated into the draft
Brisbane’s FloodSmart Future Strategy 2012-2031. This includes reference to the joint
flood study and the associated Floodplain Management Plan for the Brisbane River, being led
by Queensland Government.
Implications
20.
Brisbane’s FloodSmart Future Strategy 2012-2031 sets the strategic direction for flood risk
management across the city by promoting a risk-based and integrated approach. This will
ensure the city is safe, confident and ready for future flooding at the same time as helping to
ensure sustainable economic growth.
Customer impact
21.
The final strategy will demonstrate to Brisbane’s residents and businesses that Council has an
integrated plan to respond to the risks of flooding in the city, part of which is to provide high
quality flood information to customers to allow them to take actions to reduce the risks.
22.
The Divisional Manager, City Planning and Sustainability Division therefore recommends as
follows and the Committee agreed.
23.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL APPROVE THE FINAL BRISBANE’S FLOODSMART FUTURE
STRATEGY 2012-2031, as set out in Attachment A submitted on file.
ADOPTED
INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE
DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, Chairman of the Infrastructure Committee, moved,
seconded by Councillor Ian McKENZIE, that the report of the meeting of that Committee held on 5 March
2013, be adopted.
Acting Chairman:
DEPUTY MAYOR?
DEPUTY MAYOR:
Thank you, Madam Chairman. Look we have coming through today a
presentation from last week which is the first of a two-part presentation on the
history of Brisbane’s cross river bridges and you sometimes hear a few murmurs
and snicking from certain councillors saying that oh these presentations on
history are really not relevant today and they’re a waste of time, that’s the
implication. I would say nothing could be further from the truth. If you don’t
learn from history you are doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past and one
thing that is certain—one thing that is certain—with the presentations that have
come forward last week and also this week in committee, is that cross river
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 52 bridges are absolutely essential to the way people get around our city. But if you
look at some themes that are recurring through the ages, there’s a couple of
themes that come up and one is floods and the other is tolls.
It’s quite interesting to note that many of Brisbane’s original bridges were toll
bridges. Anyone that has listened to the public debate in the last few years
around toll tunnels or toll bridges would think that this is somehow a newfangled thing that this administration is doing and something that’s absolutely
new and outrageous and never been considered before.
The reality is the first Victoria Bridge was a toll bridge and the Story Bridge was
a toll bridge and—
Councillor CUMMING interjecting.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor CUMMING!
DEPUTY MAYOR:
—the Walter Taylor Bridge was actually a toll bridge that was built by a private
company and operated by a private company. It was entirely a private operation.
The fact of the matter is that a lot of these projects simply would not have
happened without either a toll or private investment being put into these projects.
So history does teach us something very important and that is to fund these big
infrastructure projects we need to look at things like PPPs (public–private
partnership) and we do need to look at options like toll roads. It’s a reality. It’s
happened in the past and it’s something we need to obviously keep in mind
going forward.
One other thing that came up was the impact of flooding in Brisbane and it was
interesting to note that Brisbane’s first bridge was the Breakfast Creek Bridge
and that was built in 1826. It was a wooden bridge and early versions of this
bridge were continually washed away due to flooding. The Victoria Bridge was
also severely damaged in the 1893 floods and basically permanently damaged in
the 1896 floods. So the theme that flooding has come up in recent times in
Brisbane and that we’ve never had to deal with before is also entirely bogus.
Right from the beginning of settlement in this city flooding has been an issue
that we’ve had to live with and it’s been something that we’ve had to bear in
mind when we build infrastructure as well. Certainly the methods of construction
have become a lot better over the years and today’s report—E&C report—that
we’re just debating now indicates that our approach to dealing with flood risk
management has changed a lot as well and improved a lot. So this administration
is keen to learn from what’s happened in the past in our city and we’ve certainly
taken onboard the lessons in relation to flooding and cross river bridges as well.
Next week coming through we’ll hear the more recent history of some bridges in
Brisbane and I look forward to talking to those bridges when the report comes
up.
Madam Chairman, also on the agenda today we have a number of petitions and I
invite councillors to comment as they wish.
Acting Chairman:
Further debate? Councillor CUMMING?
Councillor CUMMING:
Thanks, Madam Chair. I wish to speak in relation to Item B. I vehemently
disagree with the recommendation being put to Council. The Aveo Manly
Gardens Retirement Village has 168 units. It’s the largest retirement village in
the Wynnum Manly Ward. One hundred and one residents signed a petition
indicating that it has overwhelming support from village residents. Whites Road
is a major district access road for the Wynnum Manly district. It’s the major
access from Manly West to Lota. It also contains the Wynnum Hospital for the
time being before the LNP closes it down or privatises it.
Whites Road slopes down from where it starts at the corner of Preston and
Manly Roads, all the way down towards the village. This means very few
vehicles are travelling at the speed limit when they reach the bend before the
village. This bend means village residents don’t see the speeding oncoming
traffic until the last moment.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 53 Madam Chair, we’re dealing with elderly people here. Residents of Aveo are in
their 70s and 80s for the most part. One of the downsides of getting old is that
one’s reflexes are not as sharp as they used to be. This means the chances of an
accident with oncoming speeding traffic from around the bend in Whites Road
has increased. I should point out that most Aveo residents would be turning right
towards the bend when exiting the village. That’s the way you go if you’re
heading towards Wynnum central shopping area of Wynnum Plaza or Manly or
the city. Residents could turn left and risk someone running in the back of their
car or they would be heading for Lota which has no business or shopping area.
So Aveo residents have signed this petition seeking approximately 25 metres of
yellow no parking line to the edge of the driveway of the adjoining property—
one property next door. This would allow them more time to see oncoming
traffic. In my view this was a perfectly reasonable request and should have been
approved.
In this case funding was available and in that regard I refer the Chamber to
paragraph 28 of the response. This decision will cause fear in the hearts and
minds of the Aveo Manly Gardens Village community and it is a disgraceful
decision. It reflects an arrogant administration with an arrogant attitude towards
the elderly in the Wynnum Manly community. You should be ashamed of
yourself.
I urge the Chamber to reject the recommendation that is being put to Council.
Seriatim - Clause B
Councillor CUMMING requested that Clause B, PETITION – CALLING ON COUNCIL TO ADDRESS THE
TRAFFIC CONCERNS IN WHITES ROAD, MANLY WEST, WITHIN THE VICINITY OF AVEO MANLY
GARDENS, be taken seriatim for voting purposes.
Acting Chairman:
Thank you Councillor CUMMING. Councillor WINES?
Councillor WINES:
Thank you, Madam Chairman. I rise on Items C and D. I’m not sure if the
microphone’s picking up the wonderful iPad vision—
Acting Chairman:
Technical issue.
Councillor WINES:
—but I’d like to just speak firstly to Item C. I’d like to thank the committee and
the DEPUTY MAYOR for recognising the importance of this project to the
petitioners and to the Mitchelton community. Mitchelton State School is a
significant primary school in the southern parts of Mitchelton very near to
Sandford Road and the state and local assets do conflict a little bit there and I
recognise that state first funding will be sought for the proposal there which is a
fantastic outcome and a move in the right direction.
Also I’d like to speak to Item D, the Orchid and Clover Street roundabout and
once again thank the DEPUTY MAYOR and the committee for recognising the
ongoing volume and safety concerns at that intersection and for putting this, the
preferred option, forward which will see that resolved in the very near future.
Thank you.
Acting Chairman:
Further debate? DEPUTY MAYOR? I will now put Item B in respect of Aveo
Manly Gardens.
Clause B put
Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of Clause B of the report of the
Infrastructure Committee was declared carried on the voices.
Thereupon, Councillors CUMMING and ABRAHAMS immediately rose and called for a division, which
resulted in the motion being declared carried.
The voting was as follows:
AYES: 16 -
The DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista
ADAMS,
Matthew BOURKE,
Amanda
COOPER,
Vicki
HOWARD,
Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Geraldine KNAPP, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC,
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 54 Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN-TAYLOR,
Andrew WINES, and Norm WYNDHAM.
NOES: 7 -
The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Milton DICK, and Councillors
Helen ABRAHAMS, Peter CUMMING, Kim FLESSER, Steve GRIFFITHS,
Victoria NEWTON, and Nicole JOHNSTON.
Clauses A, C and D put
Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of Clauses A, C and D of the report of the
Infrastructure Committee was declared carried on the voices.
The report read as follows
ATTENDANCE:
Deputy Mayor, Councillor Adrian Schrinner (Chairman), Councillor Ian McKenzie (Deputy Chairman), and
Councillors Margaret de Wit, Milton Dick, Victoria Newton, and Norm Wyndham.
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – HISTORY OF BRISBANE’S CROSS
RIVER BRIDGES, PART 1
510/2012-13
1.
Ms Yvonne Douglas, Principal Engineer, Civil and Transport Program, Program Management Branch,
City Projects Office, attended the meeting to provide the Committee with the first presentation on the
history of Brisbane’s cross river bridges. Ms Douglas provided the information below.
2.
An overview and a timeline of bridge construction in Brisbane was provided. The early bridges built in
Brisbane encountered engineering problems, such as:
span length limited by available materials
multiple piers impacted by flooding
navigability of the river
geological conditions for pier locations.
3.
Brisbane’s first bridge was the Breakfast Creek bridge, built in 1826. This bridge connected the penal
settlement to the female prison at Eagle Farm. The early versions of this bridge were made from timber
and frequently collapsed due to poor construction or were washed away by floods. Eventually, the
bridge was replaced with an iron structure in 1889, and with the current concrete bridge constructed in
1958. Pictures were shown of these iron and concrete structures.
4.
The need for more cross river bridges came from the establishment of free settlement in South Brisbane
and Kangaroo Point in 1841. Private ferry services commenced in 1843 and a design competition was
held in 1863 for a permanent bridge between Queen and Melbourne Streets.
5.
Brisbane’s first cross river bridge, the Victoria Bridge, was opened in June 1865. It was a temporary
timber structure that eventually collapsed in November 1867, due to damage from marine borers.
6.
The first permanent structure of the Victoria Bridge was opened in 1874. It was a toll bridge made of
steel with a swing pan for tall-masted river traffic. This structure was severely damaged by debris in
the 1893 floods, with some spans being washed away. The structure was again damaged by flood
debris in 1896 when the bridge was pushed out of alignment. Eventually, the bridge was reconstructed
out of box girder steel in 1897.
7.
Pictures of the second, third and current Victoria Bridge were shown.
8.
Bridges were seen as critical for the future development of Brisbane when the Greater Brisbane City
Council was established in 1924. In a report written by Professor Roger Hawken in June 1926, a series
of bridges over the Brisbane River would alleviate the congestion being experienced on the Victoria
Bridge. The Cross River Bridge Commission was also established.
9.
Images were shown of the cost benefit analysis used in the consideration of the recommendations made
by the commission.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 55 10.
The immediate response to these recommendations was the construction of the William Jolly Bridge.
Construction commenced on the Grey Street Bridge in 1928, with a rainbow arch steel and concrete
encased structure. This bridge was opened in 1932 and eventually renamed to be the William Jolly
Bridge in 1955. An image was shown of the William Jolly Bridge.
11.
The Story Bridge was opened in 1940 as a toll bridge. The bridge was a steel cantilever construction
that commenced in 1935 as a Queensland Government project. It was eventually transferred to Council
in 1947, and was once known as Australia’s second largest bridge. Images were shown of the Story
Bridge.
12.
The Walter Taylor Bridge was built and operated by a private company. Tolls were collected by users
of the bridge to repay the shareholders. The Walter Taylor Bridge was taken over by Council in 1966
and the tolls were abolished. The Walter Taylor Bridge is a suspension bridge with actual surplus
support cables used to hold up the incomplete halves of the Sydney Harbour Bridge during
construction. An image of the Walter Taylor Bridge was shown.
13.
Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Ms Douglas for her
informative presentation.
14.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE REPORT.
ADOPTED
B
PETITION – CALLING ON COUNCIL TO ADDRESS THE TRAFFIC
CONCERNS IN WHITES ROAD, MANLY WEST, WITHIN THE VICINITY
OF AVEO MANLY GARDENS
CA12/523300
511/2012-13
15.
A petition from residents of Manly, requesting Council consider the dangerous state of
Whites Road, Manly West, outside the Aveo Manly Gardens retirement village, was
presented to the meeting of Council held on 20 November 2012, by Councillor Peter
Cumming and received.
16.
The Acting Manager, Transport Planning and Strategy Branch, Brisbane Infrastructure
Division provided the following information.
17.
The petition contains 101 signatures from the residents of the Aveo Manly Gardens retirement
village at 112 Whites Road, Manly West.
18.
The petitioners are concerned about the safety of motorists exiting the driveway of Aveo
Manly Gardens due to the visibility of oncoming northbound vehicles being obscured by
vehicles that are parked on the street. The petitioners have also raised concerns about the
speeds at which vehicles travel southbound on Whites Road, and the safety of the pedestrian
crossing.
19.
Whites Road, Manly West, is a 60km/h district access road in the vicinity of the Aveo Manly
Gardens retirement village and provides access to residential properties and local access
streets. The road is approximately 10 to 11 metres wide and allows for parking on both sides
of the street, while still maintaining two-way traffic flows.
20.
The Aveo Manly Gardens driveway is located on a straight section of road, with the exception
of a slight horizontal bend approximately 80 metres to the north. The driveway is
approximately 12 metres wide. Immediately north of the driveway, there is currently a
15 metre section of road where parking is prohibited. This comprises of a six metre section of
‘no standing’ and a nine metre section of ‘mail zone’.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 56 -
21.
Parking is also prohibited on the south side of the driveway due to the location of the
pedestrian crossing and bus stop located immediately adjacent to it. There are currently no
parking restrictions applied to the remainder of area. An aerial photograph of the location of
the Aveo Manly Gardens retirement village is submitted on file.
22.
Photographs taken from the driver’s viewing position when exiting the retirement village’s
driveway, to demonstrate the available sight distance in each direction, are submitted on file.
23.
There are several shops located on Whites Road, opposite the Aveo Manly Gardens
retirement village. The extension of the existing ‘no standing’ area adjacent to the retirement
village driveway, in order to improve visibility, would result in reduced parking availability
for the commercial businesses.
24.
A search of the official crash records for the period between 2005 to 2011 indicates that there
have been no reported crashes on this section of Whites Road.
25.
Additional parking restrictions are generally not applied on either side of a driveway unless
there is a significant visibility issue. Given there is sufficient sight distance available for
motorists exiting the retirement village driveway, and that removing more parking would
likely impact neighbouring businesses, additional parking restrictions are not recommended at
this location.
26.
The pedestrian crossing to the south of the retirement village driveway is located on a long
section of straight road. Motorists that approach the crossing are provided with good visibility
and there are sufficient signs and line markings installed, which were noted to be in good
condition, and in accordance with the current standards. Kerb build-outs are also installed
which provide pedestrians with improved safety as it reduces the width of road they are
required to cross.
27.
It is noted that the petitioners have raised concerns about motorists speeding in Whites Road.
Council does not have any recent traffic data available for Whites Road to confirm if speeding
is a significant safety issue at this location. However, since Whites Road is a district access
road at this location, the most appropriate treatment for speeding vehicles would by through
Police enforcement.
Funding
28.
Funding is available for the relocation of the parking signs and the mail box however, this is
not preferred option.
Consultation
29.
The Councillor for Wynnum-Manly Ward, Councillor Peter Cumming, has been consulted
and does not support the recommendation.
Preferred option
30.
It is the preferred option that the current traffic conditions in the vicinity of the Aveo Manly
Gardens retirement village remain unchanged.
31.
The Acting Manager recommends as follows and the Committee agrees, with Councillor
Steve Griffiths and Victoria Newton dissenting.
32.
RECOMMENDATION:
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 57 -
THAT THE PETITIONERS BE ADVISED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
PREFERRED OPTION ABOVE AND OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN
THE ABOVE REPORT.
ADOPTED
C
PETITION – REQUESTING COUNCIL TO ADDRESS THE TRAFFIC AND
PEDESTRIAN ISSUES IN STREETS WITHIN THE MITCHELTON
SCHOOL PRECINCT
CA12/196486
512/2012-13
33.
A petition from residents of Brisbane, requesting Council investigate and provide solutions to
the traffic and pedestrian issues in the streets within the Mitchelton school precinct, was
presented to the meeting of Council held on 12 June 2012, by Councillor Andrew Wines and
received.
34.
The Acting Manager, Transport Planning and Strategy Branch, Brisbane Infrastructure
Division provided the following information.
35.
The petition contained six signatures; five of the signatories are local residents representing
one property in Glen Retreat Road and one each in Hay Street and Gimba Street. The sixth
petitioner is the Councillor for Enoggera Ward, Councillor Andrew Wines.
36.
The Mitchelton school precinct is the area bounded by Samford Road and Glen Retreat Road.
Mitchelton High School and Mitchelton State School are located within the precinct.
37.
The petitioners are concerned about the following issues:
visibility for motorists turning into Samford Road from Mimosa Street, due to the
height of a retaining wall in Samford Road
visibility of vehicles travelling along Ellworthy Street for motorists turning into
Samford Road from Glen Retreat Road
motorists double-parking in Glen Retreat Road to drop off or pick up students
attending Mitchelton State School
motorists parking in Mimosa Street to drop off or pick up students attending
Mitchelton State School.
38.
An inspection of the intersection of Samford Road and Mimosa Street confirmed that
visibility for motorists turning into Samford road is restricted, due to the height of the
retaining wall in Samford Road to the east of the intersection. Likewise, an inspection of the
signalised intersection of Samford Road, Ellworthy Street and Glen Retreat Road confirmed
that due to the geometry of the intersection and the approach grades in Ellworthy Street and
Glen Retreat Road it can be difficult to see approaching vehicles and identify if the vehicles
are travelling straight ahead or turning into Samford Road.
39.
A search of official records shows a number of accidents recorded at each intersection. The
majority of these accidents were as a result of motorists failing to drive with due care and
attention or turning across oncoming traffic, however, there is no clear pattern of accidents to
support the claims of the petitioners.
40.
Samford Road is a major arterial road under the control of the Queensland Government’s
Department of Transport and Main Roads (DTMR). The traffic signals at the intersection of
Samford Road, Glen Retreat Road and Ellworthy Street, and the retaining wall referred to by
the petitioners, are the responsibility of DTMR. As such, these matters have been referred to
DTMR for an investigation and a direct response to the head petitioner.
41.
The main pedestrian access to Mitchelton State School is via Glen Retreat Road where a
two minute passenger zone operates adjacent to the entrance. However, due to the location of
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 58 -
bus stops and areas of No Stopping, parking is not permitted in the remaining sections of the
street adjacent to the school.
42.
Motorists double parking adjacent to the passenger zone, or parking unlawfully to set-down
or pick-up students may create a potentially dangerous situation and as such Council’s
Compliance and Regulatory Services branch has been requested to undertake regular patrols
of the school precinct to enforce the road rules.
43.
Parking is currently banned along the northern side of Mimosa Street, however parking is
unrestricted along the southern school side of the street and, as such, could be allocated for
short-term parking or two minute passenger loading during school start and finish times.
44.
Council’s Active School Travel (AST) team has undertaken investigations into the provision
of an indented two-minute passenger zone at the rear of the school, in Turnbull Street.
However, this project is currently not funded. Funding will be sought through the next round
of SafeST submissions.
45.
The AST team are also working with Mitchelton State School to promote the use of healthy
and active transport to reduce the dependence on the family car for travel to and from school.
The school joined the AST program for the 2012-13 year and early indications are
encouraging, with a significant number of students now regularly using healthy and active
travel options.
46.
It is proposed that Council continue to work with the Mitchelton State School and the AST
team to develop strategies to ensure the best use of the available kerb space for short-term
parking and passenger set-down or pick-up during school start and finish times.
Consultation
47.
The Councillor for Enoggera Ward, Councillor Andrew Wines, has been consulted and
supports the recommendation.
Preferred option
48.
It is the preferred option that Council lodges Mitchelton State School’s proposed two-minute
loading zone for future SafeST funding. Further, that the petitioners be advised that Samford
Road is under the control of the Queensland Government’s DTMR and, as such, their
concerns about visibility for motorists turning into Samford Road from Mimosa Street and
visibility of vehicles travelling along Ellworthy Street for motorists turning into Samford
Road from Glen Retreat Road have been forwarded to DTMR for an investigation and direct
response.
In addition, it is recommended that Council’s Compliance and Regulatory Services branch
undertake regular patrols of the school precinct and enforce the road rules while Council’s
AST team will continue to work with the school to develop strategies to ensure the best use of
the available kerb space for short term parking and passenger set-down/pick-up during school
start and finish times.
49.
The Acting Manager recommends as follows and the Committee agrees.
50.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT THE PETITIONERS BE ADVISED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
PREFERRED OPTION ABOVE AND OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN
THE ABOVE REPORT.
ADOPTED
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 59 -
D
PETITION – REQUESTING COUNCIL TO CONSTRUCT A ROUNDABOUT
AT THE INTERSECTION OF ORCHID AND CLOVER STREETS IN
ENOGGERA
CA12/196507
513/2012-13
51.
A petition from residents of Enoggera and Alderley, requesting Council construct a
roundabout at the intersection of Orchid and Clover Streets, Enoggera, was presented to the
meeting of Council held on 12 June 2012, by Councillor Andrew Wines and received.
52.
The Acting Manager, Transport Planning and Strategy Branch, Brisbane Infrastructure
Division provided the following information.
53.
The petition contains nine signatures from residents of Orchid Street and Staghorn Street,
Enoggera, and Willandra Street and Affleck Street, Alderley.
54.
Orchid Street is a 10-metre wide local street that provides an east-west connection between
Corbett Street and South Pine Road. Clover Street is a local street and is approximately
10.5 metres wide and provides a north-south connection between South Pine Road and
Bauhinia Avenue, Enoggera.
55.
Both Orchid and Clover Streets are located within the Orchid Street Local Area Traffic
Management (LATM) precinct, in an area bounded by South Pine Road, Elkhorn Street and
Corbett Street. Traffic management devices were proposed to be constructed throughout the
precinct during the 2010-11 financial year, as part of the LATM scheme.
56.
In the latter part of 2010, roundabouts were constructed at the intersections of Clover and
Laurel Streets and Staghorn and Elkhorn Streets, as part of the scheme with funding allocated
in the LATM budget. A roundabout was planned for the intersection of Orchid and Clover
Streets, however it was removed from the scheme following a petition being considered by
the Infrastructure Committee against this specific roundabout.
57.
With the exception of this petition, Transport Planning and Strategy branch has received no
recent complaints about the intersection or requests for Council to construct the roundabout.
58.
Orchid Street is approximately 600 metres long with a straight alignment. Drivers entering
the street from South Pine Road can see the eastern end of the street. Given that Orchid Street
traffic has priority over traffic on the side roads, some motorists may travel faster than the
50km/h urban speed limit. Constructing a roundabout at the intersection will help to control
traffic movements and reduce average vehicle speeds in Orchid Street.
59.
A search of official crash records for the period 2004 to December 2009 shows one recorded
crash at the intersection of Clover Street and Orchid Street. This accident was attributed to the
driver of a vehicle travelling along Clover Street failing to give way to a vehicle travelling
along Orchid Street.
60.
Funding is not specifically allocated under the LATM budget, to construct the roundabout,
however, given the design is complete and that the proposed roundabout would be easily
constructed, funds could be allocated from the general amenity budget to install the
roundabout. As such, it is proposed that Council consults with the directly-affected residents
prior to proceeding with the installation.
Funding
61.
Funding is available under Program 3 – Moving Brisbane to construct a roundabout at the
intersection of Orchid and Clover Streets.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 60 -
Consultation
62.
The Councillor for Enoggera Ward, Councillor Andrew Wines, has been consulted and
supports the recommendation.
Preferred option
It is the preferred option to consult with residents who would be directly affected by the
construction of a roundabout at the intersection of Orchid and Clover Streets in relation to the
installation of the remaining roundabout as part of the overall scheme prior to proceeding
with construction.
63.
The Acting Manager recommends as follows and the Committee agrees.
64.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT THE PETITIONERS BE ADVISED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
PREFERRED OPTION ABOVE AND OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN
THE ABOVE REPORT.
ADOPTED
PUBLIC AND ACTIVE TRANSPORT COMMITTEE
Councillor Peter MATIC, Chairman of the Public and Active Transport Committee, moved, seconded by
Councillor Steven Huang, that the report of that Committee held on 5 March 2013, be adopted.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor MATIC?
Councillor MATIC:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman. I’d like to move to firstly the committee
presentation which was on CityCat seating. I’d like to thank the officers for the
presentation. I think it was important to be able to outline to the committee the
number of steps that we’re taking in respect of improving our facilities in our
CityCat fleet and always looking for those ways of providing greater comfort to
our patrons.
The CityCat fleet is very popular, it continues to go from strength to strength and
as the volumes increase it’s important always to look at those simple amenity
issues such as the seating that is provided. We can’t really understate those kind
of simple steps that are the lasting memories for all users of our services and as
part of the presentation too we also noted the DDA (Disability Discrimination
Act) compliance upgrades that are happening within our CityCat fleet and our
monohulls, but also, Madam Acting Chairman, the simple steps that we’re taking
in respect of different colours for different sections of the vessel to annunciate
the DDA compliance but also make it quite clear to users not only in the area of
wheelchair accessibility but also those with visual impairments where the
disability section of the vessel is. For example, the DDA compliance that seating
area is marked clearly with red upholstery as opposed to the balance of the
regular seating which is blue. I think those simple steps are really an indication
of our commitment to making sure that we make our service as successful as
possible to all our users.
There was also as part of the presentation, Madam Acting Chairman, the types of
seating that are used externally within our CityCats and that’s an important part
of the service as well. As we know, the saltwater of the river does have an
impact upon the maintenance and quality of our vessels and as we know, there is
a strong commitment to make sure that our vessels are regularly and properly
maintained and our seating is also an important part of that.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 61 So overall a very clear indication from the officers of the level of commitment
that we have to continuing to upgrade our amenities through our various seating
options to all of our Brisbane residents.
The other item that was also raised in the meeting was a petition presented by
Councillor DICK calling on the LORD MAYOR to guarantee that passengers
will not be affected by the review of the bus routes.
An interesting item, Madam Acting Chairman, that was presented by Councillor
DICK to the committee calling on the LORD MAYOR to act in these things,
when you have to really ask the question for someone who was previously the
State director of the ALP and was probably part of the mastermind brains trust
that formed the TransLink model knows quite clearly where the line is drawn in
regards to the responsibilities of TransLink and those of Brisbane City Council.
Councillor DICK knows full well that it’s TransLink that at the end of the day of
determiner of the routes and the timetable and my question to Councillor DICK
is have you actually put forward any petition to the State Government on the
same issue with your State member or are you too busy facilitating an outcome
for the next Federal election as far as the seat of Oxley?
Those are the kind of questions, Madam Chairman, that Councillor DICK should
be answering. Putting forward a petition, a token gesture on behalf of his
residents, when the real issues—the real issues—are what is he doing in
representations to TransLink and the State Government himself. That was not
conveyed through this and at the end of the day when we set out in the
recommendation that these were issues that are within the area of responsibility
of TransLink, Councillor DICK did not support them—did not support the
recommendation, when he full well knows that that is actually the case. Politics
again for the sake of politics, rather than actually proactively working with his
residents towards those outcomes.
The TransLink review obviously has a number of challenging issues in it. Those
have been delineated quite clearly by this side of the chamber here today and the
challenges that we face must be clearly represented to the State Government.
Token and political gestures such as petitions to the LORD MAYOR what do
they do at the end of the day when it is TransLink that does and makes those
recommendations?
We on this side of the Chamber, Madam Chairman, take those recommendations
to TransLink. We argue for them. We present the argument why those routes
shouldn’t be changed. Why the services need to be protected. That’s what this
side of the Chamber does, Madam Chairman, but we do it through a proper
process and not through the targeted politics of those opposite.
So that was the kind of flavour that we had at the committee meeting. Once
again politics for the sake of politics. Nothing really substantial coming from the
ALP and once again nothing coming from their own representative in the
committee.
Acting Chairman:
Further debate? Councillor DICK?
Councillor DICK:
Thanks, Madam Chair. I rise to speak on Item B. It’s listed on page two as Item
A but I’m sure that’s a typographical error.
Look, Madam Chair, I want to speak on behalf of the people who signed the
petition. I know Councillor MATIC’s not interested in those residents and just
for the record—through you to Councillor MATIC—I am more than happy for
him to continue his line of argument against me because do you know what
happens, Madam Chair? I send those words to the residents each time and that’s
fine I’m not going to give any free advice to the chairs. I can tell you what the
reaction is to the residents who take the time to sign petitions when they read
your words. They are horrified.
So, Madam Chair, through you, keep it going because if he wants to have an
attack on me or say that for my motives, I’ll tell Councillor MATIC, through you
Madam Chair, why we’re dealing with this petition. It came from disabled
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 62 residents who live in Forest Lake because they read in the newspaper there could
be cuts to their services and in particular—this is very important—to the 460.
They went to their local State member Mr Anthony Shorten and he assured them
that there would be no cuts. He would make sure there would be no cuts. They
said to me Milton can you guarantee that and I said, well I wouldn’t believe a
word that came out of Mr Shorten for a whole range of other issues. They said,
do you think the Council would back us up? Do you think Graham Quirk, who
they may have voted for I’m not sure, will support us? I said, well you know
what, why don’t we in preparation just in case. They said, I don’t think the state
government will do that. Campbell Newman’s a man of his word. They thought
their state member was a man of their word and they said to me but you know
what, let’s take some insurance out and I said okay, sure, I’m happy to do that.
So they went around, got some support from family and friends. That’s fine,
that’s my job as their local representative, to help them, to support them. So the
response back from Council is—through the chair through to you Councillor
MATIC—it’s nothing to do with us. We don’t care about what you think. You
can attack me all you want. You question me about what I’ve done. Have I done
a petition? Here it is. Here is the petition and this—can I just say this is two
hours worth of work. I had to leave to another function. People were banging on
my car door at the Inala Civic Centre before I got out of the car wanting to say
could we sign something, can we do something.
Councillor MATIC that’s fine, look over here. Here are the signatures, here they
all are. I’ve just got an email from my office. Someone who came and visited me
who also was worried about the 460 has bought in nine pages after going door to
door in Forest Lake today. I don’t know who that person is but they came up to
me—so that is the level that you’re dismissing Councillor MATIC. These people
are worried because they are fearful and they are concerned and they don’t trust
the LNP. That’s the bottom line and they want their Council to stand up for
them. This ridiculous response saying well it’s nothing to do with us, apparently
we have nothing to do with buses, we have nothing to do with buses, paragraph
12—through you, Madam Chair—Council has not been involved in planning any
changes related to service reductions. Well my question is why won’t you
release the correspondence?
I’ve had a good look at Councillor SCHRINNER’s submission and if that’s
anything to go by, I can’t wait till I call the file to read Councillor MATIC’s
submission, but that’s another story.
Paragraph 14, Madam Chair, of the report:
Where TransLink has proposed reducing services, Council has very specific
concerns and made it clear that there will be a negative impact on the
community, excessive, early and the overall use of public transport.
So what did the response say? Did the response say yes we’re behind you, yes
we’ll find those TransLink support—what TransLink and the state government
are trying to do? No. Councillor MATIC simply sat back and said well we don’t
care, you’re on your own. Well that’s not good enough.
I will be sending a copy of the residents who signed that petition and probably, I
don’t know, the thousand residents that have already signed the petition in a
couple of days in my own local area and you’re damn right Councillor MATIC, I
will talk about my local area day and night until you’re blue in the face
because—until I’m blue in the face because I’m sick and tired of the LNP—until
the LNP start listening to the community, till the LNP start acting on their
concerns instead of ignoring them and that’s what this petition response is—a
complete and utter disrespect for those residents who were fearful before this
and my hat’s off to them. Weren’t they gratuitous in actually predicting what
could happen? They were worried, they took insurance out. This Council
rejected their concerns, ignored their concerns and I’m not surprised listening to
the bad job that Councillor MATIC’s done trying to—the consistently bad job
he’s done today in trying to talk about rejecting the changes but deep down
supporting them and actually endorsing them.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 63 Acting Chairman:
Further debate? Councillor MATIC?
Councillor MATIC:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman, and there you have it, complete and utter
rhetoric and contradiction within his own speech by Councillor DICK.
One minute he says that these were residents who supported the LNP and
thought that the premier wouldn’t lose and the next minute in the same sentence
he says—
Councillor DICK:
Point of order, Madam Chairman?
Acting Chairman:
Point of order against you Councillor MATIC. Councillor DICK?
Councillor DICK:
Claim to be misrepresented.
Acting Chairman:
Thank you. Councillor MATIC?
Councillor MATIC:
I don’t think so, Madam Acting Chairman, it’s quite clearly on the record and in
the next breath he says that they don’t trust the State Government and that’s why
they’ve done the petition—
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Point of order, Madam Chairman?
Acting Chairman:
Point of order against you Councillor DICK. Councillor JOHNSTON?
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Madam Deputy Chairman, yes I’d just ask Item B is taken seriatim for voting
purposes please.
Acting Chairman:
Thank you. Councillor MATIC?
Councillor MATIC:
Madam Acting Chairman, there you have it, the duplicity from Councillor DICK
on this issue. He wants to send out my response to residents. Well I’m in the
Chamber. There is on record what I’m saying. It’s been available since there was
an LNP administration in Council in 2008 thanks to Campbell Newman. Feel
free to send it out, but unlike the normal tactics of the ALP, don’t send it out just
to the ones that suit you, send the whole lot out, send it all out. Feel free to send
it to the world because it’s available to the world.
Madam Acting Chairman, I speak in this Chamber on issues freely because it is
available to the world. I’m not going to stand here and spread the kind of stories
that ALP councillors do and mislead and spread fear—thank you Councillor
MURPHY—and spread fear to their residents.
These are serious issues under this review. They need to be addressed properly,
constructively. They need to be made as submissions from councillors. These are
the kind of things that we need to address. That was why we put the motion up
today, to address these issues. Not to go out, Madam Chairman, what they’re
doing, what ALP councillors are doing, politics for the state of politics and to
deny that the TransLink authority which they established—the ALP
established—was the overarching authority for routes and timetables. To deny
that basic fact is to mislead your residents and yet you continue to do it
Councillor DICK.
Well, Madam Acting Chairman, we won’t. We will speak the truth as we always
do. We will look after Brisbane residents. We will go out and tell them exactly
the fact that this is a state government review, that TransLink is the overarching
authority, that we have made submissions on this in the past, that we will
continue to make strong representations in the future. The LORD MAYOR has
said it in the past, we’ve said it today and we continue our strong commitment to
residents and petitions like this, Madam Acting Chairman, made on behalf of
residents who have genuine concerns, political petitions like this sent forward by
Councillor DICK do nothing to bring forward the discussion on addressing their
real concerns.
The recommendation they’ve put forward, that Councillor DICK would not
support the recommendation that TransLink is the overarching authority and that
we’ve forward these concerns to TransLink to take into consideration as part of
the review, to refuse to accept that is to mislead this chamber and to mislead his
residents.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor DICK you claim to be misrepresented?
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 64 Councillor DICK:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chair. Councillor MATIC made the claim that I had
said that residents have voted for the LNP. I said no such thing. I said I had no
idea, I wasn’t aware of how they voted.
Acting Chairman:
Order. Councillor JOHNSTON you requested that Item B be taken in seriatim
for voting purposes. In accordance with section 22(3) of the Meeting
Subordinate Local Law you did not request this prior to the mover of the report
exercising commencement of his right of reply. Therefore the report will be
taken in entirety not in seriatim.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Point of order, Madam Deputy Chairman? What was that rule again so I’ve got
it?
Acting Chairman:
22(3) of the Meeting Subordinate Local Law. I’m happy to read it for the benefit
of the chamber.
22(1) states:
‘When a motion consists of more than one statement, action or concept such
statements, actions or concepts shall be put seriatim if any councillor so
requests.’
22(3) states:
‘If it is intended only to vote on a motion seriatim, then the request must be
made prior to the mover of the motion exercising a right of reply.’
I will now put the report.
Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of the report of the Public and Active
Transport Committee was declared carried on the voices.
Thereupon, Councillors DICK and ABRAHAMS immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in
the motion being declared carried.
The voting was as follows:
AYES: 17 -
The DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors Krista
ADAMS,
Matthew BOURKE,
Amanda
COOPER,
Vicki
HOWARD,
Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Geraldine KNAPP, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC,
Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN-TAYLOR,
Andrew WINES, Norm WYNDHAM and Nicole JOHNSTON.
NOES: 6 -
The Leader of the OPPOSITION, Councillor Milton DICK, and Councillors
Helen ABRAHAMS, Peter CUMMING, Kim FLESSER, Steve GRIFFITHS,
Victoria NEWTON.
The report read as follows
ATTENDANCE:
Councillor Peter Matic (Chairman); Councillor Steven Huang (Deputy Chairman), and Councillors
Steve Griffiths, Nicole Johnston, Kim Marx and Ryan Murphy.
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – CITYCAT SEATING
514/2012-13
1.
Peter Whelan, Project Officer, Project and Program Coordination, Transport Planning and
Strategy Branch, Brisbane Infrastructure Division, attended the meeting to provide the
committee with information on the seating in Brisbane’s CityCat fleet. Mr Whelan provided
the information below.
2.
The seating capacities of the three generations of CityCat vessels were shown. The highest
capacity seating was provided in the second generation vessels, with total seating capacity for
119. The first generation CityCat vessels had a total seating capacity of 71 and the third
generation vessels provide seating for 114 passengers.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 65 -
3.
The traditional style of the interior cabin includes high-backed padded seating on marinegrade stainless steel frames with seat covering material that is anti-graffiti. Examples of the
seating fabric were distributed to the Committee and Mr Whelan explained that the pattern
hides any form of marking pen damage and carries a low risk of spray can damage. The seats
are recovered as required and the average life span of the material is between three and five
years.
4.
All of the seats within the third generation CityCats are Disability Standards for Accessible
Public Transport (DSAPT) compliant. The new colour format of the seating material meets
accessibility standards with blue identifying standard seating and red denoting priority
seating. Fold down seating also allows space for wheelchairs, as well as prams, maximising
capacity inside the vessel.
5.
Seating on the exterior decks of the latest generation of CityCat vessels include moulded
plastic seats fitted on free-standing marine-grade stainless steel frames. In the first generation
CityCats, the seating on the external decks were stainless steel bench-style seats. Moving
away from this style of seating, the seats are now padded with a marine-grade vinyl covering.
Seating on the exterior decks of the new CityCat vessels are also DSAPT compliant, with the
fold down seating spaces for wheelchairs and prams.
6.
Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Mr Whelan for
his informative presentation.
7.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE
REPORT.
ADOPTED
B
PETITION – CALLING ON THE LORD MAYOR TO GUARANTEE THAT
PASSENGERS WILL NOT BE AFFECTED BY THE REVIEW OF BUS
ROUTES
CA13/71296
515/2012-13
8.
A petition from residents of Brisbane, requesting that they will be no worse off as a result of
the Queensland Government’s review of bus routes and services was presented to the meeting
of Council held on 5 February 2013 by Councillor Milton Dick and received.
9.
The Divisional Manager, Brisbane Transport Division, supplied the following information.
10.
The petition contained 44 signatures. Of the signatories, 21 petitioners resided in Inala, six in
Oxley, and five in Forest Lake. The remaining 12 petitioners are from the surrounding
suburbs.
11.
TransLink, is a division of the Department of Transport and Main Roads in the Queensland
Government, and is responsible for the delivery of public transport services and infrastructure
for South East Queensland.
12.
Council continues to have a major role in bus services. However, Translink oversees all
public transport delivery in South East Queensland, and has the authority to support or initiate
changes to bus services. In this case, the bus network review is being undertaken by
TransLink. Council has not been involved in planning any changes related to service
reductions and the Lord Mayor is not in a position to guarantee that there will be no reduction
of services in Inala, or across the whole Brisbane City Council contracted area.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 66 -
13.
Council has recommended that service levels should not be decreased by the proposed
changes; rather there should be a range of service augmentations across the network, to
address demand for services.
14.
Where TransLink has proposed reducing services, Council has raised specific concerns and
made it clear that there will be a negative impact on the community, accessibility and the
overall use of public transport. Council has raised particular concerns with proposals that
would disadvantage people who have limited alternatives, school children and elderly
passengers.
15.
TransLink will determine the outcomes of the review and the extent to which feedback from
the community and Council is considered.
Consultation
16.
The Councillor for Richlands Ward, Councillor Milton Dick, has been consulted and does not
support the recommendation.
Preferred option
17.
It is the preferred option that the petitioners be advised that TransLink is responsible for the
review of the bus network.
Petitioners should also be advised that the Brisbane City Council is not in a position to
guarantee that passengers will not be affected by the TransLink review outcomes, but that
Council will forward their concerns to TransLink for consideration.
18.
The Divisional Manager recommends as follows and the Committee agrees, with Councillor
Steve Griffiths dissenting.
19.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT THE PETITIONERS BE ADVISED OF THE INFORMATION CONTAINED
IN THIS REPORT.
ADOPTED
NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT
COMMITTEE
Councillor Amanda COOPER, Chairman of the Neighbourhood Planning and Development Assessment
Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor Vicki HOWARD, that the report of the meeting of that Committee
held on 5 March 2013, be adopted.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor COOPER?
Councillor COOPER:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chair. We had an application coming to our
committee last week. It was an impact assessable application for a preliminary
approval for carrying out building work, reconfigure of some lots, four into two,
sales and display activity, shop, restaurant and ancillary office. This was located
at the corner of Garden Road and Pine Road, Richlands, and this was publicly
notified from 5 December to 14 January 2013. There were a couple of
submissions. There was one that was actually a duplicate so we captured that as
part of that. In particular this application was lodged with Council in June last
year. It’s located very much in the Western Gateway Local Plan and is consistent
with the draft Richlands Wacol Corridor Neighbourhood Plan and it is
particularly proposed under this plan to actually change to MP2 from currently
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 67 emerging community. It’s very much therefore, Madam Deputy Chair, in line
with what the draft plan envisages for this site.
At the committee we heard that there’s a Masters Home Improvement Centre
being proposed to be put on one of the two lots. I note that this seems to be
certainly a number of these going up across our city. It seems that everybody is
secretly at heart a bit of a home handyman in Brisbane.
This application has been carefully considered by Council officers and I note
that the submissions were actually generally supportive of the particular
proposal, really just talking about whether there was orderly development of the
surrounding properties and ensuring that infrastructure was provided to not
disadvantage any adjoining site and to also of course to consider carefully the
Waterway Corridor.
We talked about this one at length at the committee and I think Councillor
ABRAHAMS was very interested particularly in the Waterway Corridor and its
design and the Council officers demonstrated very clearly that they have worked
through those issues extensively as part of this proposal.
Also there was flood modelling provided to assess the stormwater management
plan to ensure that this proposal could be supported and I thank the Council
engineer who is able to very clearly provide answers to all questions on the spot.
He was very impressive. I was thrilled that he could answer those questions so
quickly and effectively and demonstrate very clearly how the application was
accordingly being conditioned.
The applicants also got conditions relating to rehabilitation of the Waterway
Corridor and this will ensure that there is no potential adverse flooding impacts
upstream or downstream. Part of this assessment also was carefully considering
the traffic impact of the application. Council specifically conditioned service
vehicles only accessing the site from Garden Road with customers separated to
access from Pine Road only. This was an application which required
concurrence from DTMR (Department of Transport and Main Roads) and they
have applied specific conditions to the application.
There will also be trunk infrastructure that facilitates orderly development of the
adjoining site with trunk sewer main and stormwater mains in the Pine Road
reserve.
Madam Chair, Pine Road will be widened along the entire frontage of the site.
There’ll be a dedicated truncation on the corner of Pine and Garden Roads and
the road upgrade will also improve access to the Queensland Lions Football
Club from Pine Road which I think was one of the primary considerations of the
local councillor. Certainly Councillor DICK was keen to ensure that all turn
access would still be maintained under this approval and that is the case.
This site will have 447 car parks. It really is also very close to public transport,
about 200 metres from the Richlands railway and bus stations as well as bus
stops along Pine Road.
I am pleased to see that the local council was in support of this application and it
was very exciting to see that this application was unanimously supported by the
committee.
Madam Deputy Chair, this application will see jobs on the ground, so not only
will it encourage jobs to be done at home with your handyman tools, but we will
see people actually working on the site, constructing it of course but on an
ongoing basis. So it’s always great to encourage investment in our city and I
would like to thank the Council officers for their presentation.
We had a first-timer at committee last week. One of the Council officers was
presenting, it was his first time and he was very brave and answered all of our
questions very carefully and in a considered fashion. So I appreciate that,
appreciate all the efforts of the team and we are pleased to see this application
come to Council for decision. Thank you.
Acting Chairman:
Further debate? Councillor ABRAHAMS?
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 68 Councillor ABRAHAMS:
Thank you, Madam Chair. I quickly wish to comment on this development
application.
There is an existing waterway across the site as only humans want to do. Council
is relocating that waterway to a site we think is more appropriate, certainly a site
that facilitates the development.
I was advised that the Waterway Corridor is 40 metres in width currently; it is
constrained along the southern side of the site approximately 25 metres and then
opens up to a wider corridor on the western side.
I have concerns because to make water turn corners, is really not consistent with
laminar flow which is how we know water wishes to flow and therefore I asked
in committee and I ask again now that when this waterway is in place, that we
have a submission—or no we have a presentation—on that waterway, what was
achieved, what was the landscaping, so that we can learn from just how effective
Council is when we determine that a natural watercourse needs to be modified.
Acting Chairman:
Further debate? Councillor JOHNSTON?
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Yes, Madam Deputy Chairman. I rise today to say I don’t support this
development application and there are several reasons for that.
I note the DA is not actually in the Chamber here today, but the submission itself
before us is enough to give me concern and the three areas of concern that I have
are (1) the statement that this proposed development includes realignment of the
Waterway Corridor, (2) rehabilitation of the Waterway Corridor and (3) filling
and excavation.
We’ve just had a debate in this place that says pretty much, you know, is the
right land used for the right area and we shouldn’t be building things where
they’re known to flood and so forth. Not only are we within the same meeting
ignoring the glossy piece of paper that I said wasn’t worth the paper it was
printed on, in practise again 10 minutes later we see where that’s happening.
Now I know Councillor COOPER will get up and say I’m stupid and I don’t
know anything and I haven’t read anything—well perhaps you would like to
admonish the—
Councillors interjecting.
Acting Chairman:
Order.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
—Deputy Chairman who interjected very loudly then—
Acting Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON you are rising to this debate, speak on the report please.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
I am, Madam Chairman, but there’s interjections coming left, right—
Acting Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON you have been interjecting all afternoon. Continue your
speech or resume your seat.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Madam Chairman, as I said, no doubt the personal attacks will come from
Councillor COOPER. She and Councillor MATIC have the same playbook
there. But what I will say is if this Council’s serious about dealing with flood
issues in this city, it cannot continue to allow sites that are known flood areas,
known at risk areas, to be dramatically altered as they are in this case. I don’t
think altering the course of a natural waterway is a good idea and I’m sorry to
the Labor Party who support this. There’s no problem with the Masters or a
Bunnings or whatever it is, but the ultimate problem here is we are taking
something that nature has delivered in our area and we’re saying nuh we’re
going to change it. We know better. Man can construct it better. Forty years
we’ve had that philosophy in this Council and it’s not working. It doesn’t work.
You can’t engineer your way out of floods. It does not work.
Council allowed that Bunnings to be built there in the back of Rocklea and I’ll
tell you it goes underwater every five minutes. This is not a good idea. It’s not
okay to alter a waterway and it’s certainly not okay to fill and it doesn’t even say
how much fill’s going in but I imagine it’s a very significant amount because
they’ll be trying to improve the flood immunity. Well that water displaces.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 69 I simply do not support this. This is one of those problems that we just see
happening over and over and over again and you would have thought this
Council would learn its lessons. You would have thought on the same day they
were putting out a glossy brochure saying that we’re doing the right thing, we
might actually do it. Well in this case we’re not and I strongly oppose this
application.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor COOPER?
Councillor COOPER:
Thank you very much, Madam Deputy Chair. No, actually Madam Acting Chair.
I apologise.
In relation to this application, I note the comments of Councillor ABRAHAMS
but it is very clear and was made very clear at committee last week that there is a
specific condition, condition 36, which refers to a rehabilitation plan being
required to be prepared by a qualified professional in waterway rehabilitation
which unfortunately members of my committee are not. I make note of that.
So there is a specific person who will be carefully considering these sorts of
matters as well as a hydraulic engineer being required to certify that the
rehabilitation plan considers channel design and flood modelling. So the Council
officers have made sure that this issue is specifically addressed. That is part of
the conditions of the approval and I note, Madam Acting Chair, that I do not
profess to be an expert at hydraulic engineering.
I do not profess to be an expert on many of these technical issues relating to
waterway rehabilitation. I believe I strongly am supportive of Council officers
and their expertise. I think that they make decisions based on the facts, Madam
Acting Chair, rather than spurious commentary that occasionally we get made
recipients of in this chamber. So I rely on them to provide us with the facts of the
matter. I am satisfied that they have done their job properly and I believe that
they have addressed all of the issues.
I also note that the local councillor is supportive of this application and I note
that the local councillor, who was previously a member of the committee, does
perhaps have a little bit more understanding that these issues have been
addressed satisfactorily and certainly his support. I can't imagine that he would
support an application that would suggest any impacts on his residents.
So I think that that really asks and answers the questions, Madam Chair, the
questions that are of any relevance to this chamber. Thank you.
Acting Chairman:
I will now put the report.
Upon being submitted to the Chamber by the Chairman, the motion for the adoption of the report of the
Neighbourhood Planning and Development Assessment Committee was declared carried on the voices.
The report as follows
ATTENDANCE:
Councillor Amanda Cooper (Chairman), Councillor Vicki Howard (Deputy Chairman), and
Councillors Helen Abrahams, Geraldine Knapp, Shayne Sutton and Andrew Wines.
A
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION UNDER THE SUSTAINABLE PLANNING
ACT 2009 – PRELIMINARY APPROVAL FOR CARRYING OUT BUILDING
WORK,
PRELIMINARY
APPROVAL
FOR
CARRYING
OUT
OPERATIONAL
WORK,
DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT
FOR
RECONFIGURATION OF A LOT AND DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FOR
MATERIAL CHANGE OF USE FOR DISPLAY AND SALE ACTIVITIES,
GARDEN CENTRE, SHOP, RESTAURANT AND ANCILLARY OFFICE –
85 GARDEN ROAD AND 108 TO 144 PINE ROAD, RICHLANDS – HYDROX
NOMINEES PTY LTD
A003379427
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 70 -
516/2012-13
1.
The Team Manager, Planning Services South Team, Development Assessment Branch, City
Planning and Sustainability Division, reported that an application was submitted on 20 June
2012, by Cardno Humphreys Reynolds Perkins Pty Ltd, on behalf of Hydrox Nominees Pty
Ltd, as follows:
Development aspects:
Reconfiguration of a lot – Development Permint (under
section 243 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (SPA))
Material change of use – development Permit (under
section 243 of SPA)
Carrying out building work – Preliminary approval (under
section. 241 of SPA)
Carry out operational work – Preliminary approval (under
section 241 of SPA)
General description proposal:
Subdivision (four into two lots) and Masters Home
Improvement Centre – Display and sale activities, garden
centre, shop, restaurant and ancillary office and filling and
excavation
Land in the ownership of:
Hydrox Nominees Pty Ltd
Address of the site:
85 Garden Road and 108 to 144 Pine Road, Richlands
Described as:
Lot 1 on Survey Plan 111235, lot 2 on Survey Plan
111234, lot 17 on Registered Plan 49601 and lot 18 on
Registered Plan 49601
Containing an area of:
64, 610 square metres.
2.
The subject site is located on the corner of Garden and Pine Roads, Richlands, and is largely
vacant with the exception of a single detached residential dwelling. A waterway corridor
traverses the site from south to north. The site is situated within the Western Gateway Local
Plan (Richlands Precinct) and designated as Emerging Community Area.
3.
The proposed development includes the following components:
subdivision (four into two lots)
Masters Home Improvement Centre
realignment of the waterway corridor (within the site)
rehabilitation of the waterway corridor
road dedication and external road works (on Pine Road)
pedestrian pathways along Pine and Garden Roads
an upgrade of external infrastructure
service vehicle access entry only from Garden Road and egress to Pine Road, with
car access and egress via Pine Road
filling and excavation.
4.
The proposal is consistent with the intent of the South East Queensland Regional Plan 20092031 (Regional Plan) and the Brisbane City Plan 2000 (City Plan) for the following reasons:
The subject site is within the Urban Footprint of the Regional Plan.
The proposal promotes economic development stipulated in the Temporary State
Planning Policy SPP 2/12 – Planning for Prosperity.
The proposal meets the requirements of the State Planning Policy SPP4/10 – Healthy
Waters.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 71 -
-
-
-
5.
The proposed use for display and sale activities, garden centre, shop, restaurant and
ancillary office is compatible with the intended commercial and retail uses within this
locality as indicated in the Draft Richlands Wacol Corridor Neighbourhood Plan.
The site is within close proximity to public transport, including the Richlands
Railway and Bus Station (within 200 metres walking distance) and bus stops along
the Pine Road frontage of the site.
Infrastructure for water supply, sewerage, stormwater and telecommunications can be
readily provided to the site.
The capacity of existing infrastructure (transport, sewerage and stormwater) shall be
upgraded prior to the development commencing.
The proposed subdivision creates lot sizes that are consistent with established
allotments within the locality and shall not prejudice the orderly development of
adjoining land.
Matters considered as part of the assessment are detailed below.
Draft Richlands Wacol Corridor Neighbourhood Plan
6.
The proposal is consistent with the draft Richlands Wacol Corridor Neighbourhood Plan Richlands Central Precinct (Richlands Rail Core) for the following reasons:
The precinct is intended to develop as a retail, commercial and office area servicing
the local community and industrial needs.
The proposed area designation of the site is changing to Multi-purpose MP3
(Suburban Centre) which will accommodate the proposed uses.
Roadworks shall be undertaken to upgrade Pine Road identified for improvement.
Realignment of waterway corridor
7.
Realignment of the waterway corridor is supported by flood modelling within the Masters
Home Improvement Development – Stormwater Management Plan J11084/R1v5 prepared by
Cardno (Qld) Pty Ltd, dated 8 November 2012. The following factors also support
realignment:
-
Flood modelling demonstrated that no adverse impacts are noted for upstream and
downstream.
The realignment in the north-south portion of the waterway incorporates natural
channel design and rehabilitation as an ecological corridor.
The culvert in Pine Road is to be upgraded to improve flood immunity.
The landowner is to maintain the waterway corridor.
Access and onsite carparking
8.
A traffic study prepared by Cambray Consulting Pty Ltd demonstrates that safe and
convenient vehicle movement and parking can be achieved by:
service vehicle access from Garden Road and egress to Pine Road
customer access and egress via Pine Road only
on-site car parking provision that is consistent with existing like uses, such as
Bunnings Hardware House and Masters Home Improvement Centre developments.
External road works
9.
Pine Road is required to be widened along the entire frontage of the site and a truncation is to
be dedicated at the corner of Garden and Pine Roads. The subsequent road upgrade will
preserve all turn access to the Queensland Lions Football Club from Pine Road.
10.
External works are required along the Pine Road frontage of the site and include road
pavement, drainage, signage, stormwater culvert, stormwater mains and kerb and channel.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 72 -
Only those works along the Pine Road frontage of the site are identified as trunk transport
infrastructure in the Brisbane Priority Infrastructure Plan 2011, which can be offset against
the applicable transport infrastructure charge for the site.
Infrastructure
11.
The proposal involves provision of trunk infrastructure, which will facilitate the orderly
development of adjoining properties, being:
trunk sewer main constructed to the site and upstream property boundary to facilitate
the orderly future development of adjoining properties
trunk stormwater mains in the Pine Road reserve to be included as trunk external
works.
Orderly development
12.
An access easement to the rear of proposed lot 2 caters for future road requirements for
approved development on land at 137 Progress Road, Richlands.
Referral agencies
13.
The concurrence agency identified under SPA was the Department of Transport and Main
Roads. Requirements have been conditioned in the department’s correspondence dated 15
February 2013.
Public notification
14.
The application was subject to impact assessment and was publicly notified. There were four
submissions received during the public notification period; two were properly made, one was
a duplicate copy and one was lodged outside of the notification period. Matters raised in the
submissions, which have been considered as part of the assessment of the application, are
summarised as follows:
general support for the proposed land use
-
need to ensure orderly development of surrounding properties
infrastructure required for the site to allow adjoining properties to develop
waterway corridor design issues.
Local councillor consultation
15.
The Councillor for Richlands Ward, Councillor Milton Dick, advised that he generally
supports the proposal, but requested: consideration of impacts on local business, maintaining
access to Queensland Lions Football Club and retaining bus stops along Pine Road.
16.
All matters identified by the local councillor and the submitters were considered in the
assessment of the proposal, determined to comply with the required criteria of the City Plan
or can be addressed by reasonable and relevant conditions.
17.
The Team Manager advises that relevant reports have been obtained to address the assessment
criteria and decision process prescribed by SPA outlining appropriate developmental
requirements.
18.
The Team Manager recommends that the application be approved subject to reasonable and
relevant conditions, and the Committee agrees unanimously.
19.
RECOMMENDATION:
(i)
That it be and is hereby resolved that whereas—
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 73 -
(a)
a development application (distributor-retailer) was properly made on
28 June 2012 to the Council pursuant to section 260 of the Sustainable
Planning Act 2009 (SPA), as follows:
Reconfiguration of a lot – Development permint
(under section 243 of SPA)
Material change of use – Development permit
(under section 243 of SPA) and
Carrying out building work – Preliminary approval
(under section. 241 of SPA)
Carry out operational work – Preliminary approval
(under section. 241 of SPA)
Development aspects:
General description
proposal:
(b)
of
Subdivision (four into two lots) and Masters Home
Improvement Centre – Display and sale activities,
garden centre, shop, restaurant and ancillary office
and filling and excavation
Land in the ownership of:
Hydrox Nominees Pty Ltd
Address of the site:
Described as:
85 Garden Road and 108 to 144 Pine Road,
Richlands
Lot 1 on Survey Plan 111235, lot 2 on Survey Plan
111234, lot 17 on Registered Plan 49601 and lot 18
on Registered Plan 49601
Containing an area of:
64, 610 square metres
The Council is required to assess the application under section 260 of the
SPA, and decide the application under sections 324 and 326 of the Act;
The Council—
(A)
Upon consideration of the application and those matters set forth in sections
314, 324 and 326 of the Sustainable Planning Act 2009 (SPA) relevant to the
application considers that:
1.
The subject site is within the urban footprint in the South East
Queensland Regional Plan 2009-2031.
2.
The applicant has demonstrated that the proposal does not conflict
and is consistent with Temporary State Planning Policy SPP 2/12 –
Planning for Prosperity; and SPP4/10 Healthy Waters.
3.
The proposal is consistent with the desired environmental outcomes
and relevant codes of the Brisbane City Plan 2000 (City Plan).
4.
The proposed subdivision creates lot sizes that are consistent with
established allotments within the locality and shall not prejudice the
orderly development of adjoining land.
5.
The proposed use for display and sale activities, garden centre, shop,
restaurant and ancillary office is compatible with the intended
commercial and retail uses within this locality as indicated in the
Draft Richlands Wacol Corridor Neighbourhood Plan.
6.
The site is within proximity to public transport, including the
Richlands Railway and Bus Station (within 200 metres walking
distance) and bus stops along the Pine Road frontage of the site.
7.
Infrastructure for water supply, sewerage, stormwater and
telecommunications can be readily provided to the site.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 74 -
8.
9.
(ii)
The capacity of existing infrastructure (transport, sewerage and
stormwater) shall be upgraded prior to the development commencing.
Representations to all submissions lodged pursuant to the SPA for
the proposed development made have been addressed.
(B)
Accordingly considers that were reasonable and relevant conditions imposed
on the development, it would be appropriate that the proposed development
be carried out on the subject land;
(C)
Issue Brisbane City Council Adopted Infrastructure Charges Notices for the
development pursuant to the SPA and Brisbane Adopted Infrastructure
Charges Resolution (No. 2) 2011, for the transport, community purposes and
stormwater trunk infrastructure networks;
(D)
Under section 755A of the SPA, Council on behalf of Queensland Urban
Utilities, as the Central SEQ Distributor Retailer Authority, will issue
Adopted Infrastructure Charges Notices for the sewerage and water supply
trunk infrastructure networks.
Whereas the Council determines as in (i) hereof, THE COUNCIL APPROVES
THE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION referred to above and subject to the
conditions in the Development Approval Package, submitted and marked Attachment
A, and accordingly will:
(a)
notify the applicant of the decision and any Adopted Infrastructure Charges
Notices
(b)
notify the Central SEQ Distributor-Retailer Authority of the decision and be
given a copy of any Adopted Infrastructure Charges Notice
(c)
notify the Councillor for Richlands Ward, Councillor Milton Dick, of the
decision
(d)
(e)
(f)
notify the Manager of City Planning of the decision
notify the Department of Transport and Main Roads as a concurrence agency,
of the decision
notify the submitters of this decision at the expiration of the applicant’s
appeal period.
ADOPTED
ENVIRONMENT, PARKS AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE
Councillor Matthew BOURKE, Chairman of the Environment, Parks and Sustainability Committee, moved,
seconded by Councillor Fiona KING, that the report of the meeting of that Committee held on 5 March 2013, be
adopted.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor BOURKE.
Councillor BOURKE:
Thanks very much, Madam Acting Chairman. Look, just one thing before I
move to the formal committee report that we have before us.
In light of the comments from Councillor ABRAHAMS last week about the
importance of fighting that great challenge, which is climate change, I thought it
was interesting in The Weekend Australian on 2 and 3 March 2013 that there was
an article called, ‘In this climate one department is not safe’, and it went through
and outlined how the 1094 staff members the administrators who administrate
the administrators who then administrate the administrators for the
administration of the carbon tax spent some of the good money that this Council
pays, some of the $24 million that we pay on top of the significant amount of
work that we already do.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 75 Just as a couple of highlights, and I'm going to drop these each week, I thought
for the Council Chambers interest, hospitality. The department's hospitality costs
for the first four months of the 2012-2013 financial year were $91,257 and the
department's total costs for the 2011-2012 financial year were some $217,000,
Madam Chairman. That's the good rate dollars that the citizens of the city of
Brisbane are forking out for the Federal Government's carbon tax.
Madam Chairman, they also—but it gets worse, Councillor MURPHY. They
also spent $795 every three to four weeks to buy 30 bags of coffee beans at an
annual cost of $9500 for their some 13 or 14 XS90 coffee machines that cost
about $3500 each.
Madam Chairman, if nothing else shows why the Federal Government's carbon
tax doesn’t belong and should not be in this country, Madam Chairman, it is the
gross mismanagement and mis-spending of this money that is meant to be
collected to protect and enhance and reduce the impacts on the environment, not
frittered away by the Labor Party down there in Canberra on jovial things, on
travel, on leadership forums, on hospitality and on coffee machines, Madam
Chairman. It's a shame that the residents of Brisbane continue to have to fork out
money to be wasted like that.
Turning to the formal report, Madam Chairman, a wonderful presentation, all
encompassing, informative, well received by all members of the committee,
except for one, Madam Chairman, on vinegar flies. I thought quite an apt and
appointed presentation at the time, Madam Chairman, considering the plague of
small flies that are invading the whole of the city as a result of the severe amount
of wet weather we've had, Madam Chairman.
Some interesting points that came out of the presentation about how the flies
actually feed, what they feed on, the misconceptions sometimes that they're fruit
flies, Madam Chairman, and also some practical and quite important ways that
residents can deal with the issues themselves at home on how to manage the
impacts of the vinegar fly.
It's a shame that Councillor CUMMING didn't think that the presentation was
important and chose instead to attack the Council officers for delivering the
presentation, Madam Chairman. I know that the media picked up the story and
Brisbane Times ran a story this week and I know The Courier Mail has run a
story previously, Madam Chairman, on quite a significant issue that's affecting a
lot of the residents of Brisbane, Madam Chairman, and I thought it was
important that the committee had that presentation.
I thought it was also important that we took on Councillor CUMMING's advice
last week and suggestion about doing a presentation on common flies and so the
committee had another informative presentation today about flies of Brisbane
part one and we can only wait to see what comes in the following weeks.
The other item, Madam Chairman, on—I'll take that interjection, Councillor
SCHRINNER. Things that fly that aren't flies might be another presentation,
Councillor SCHRINNER.
The other item, item B, is the formal park naming for the existing parkland on
Milton Road at Milton to be called Frew Park, Madam Chairman, and the new
tennis centre within this park to be named after Roy Emerson called The Roy
Emerson Tennis Centre.
Madam Chairman, there's a long history to that site in relation to tennis and the
home of tennis in Queensland for many, many years. I have many memories of
driving past the old Milton tennis courts when I was much younger and seeing
people playing tennis on that site and the history. I wasn't fully aware of how
long the history was, Madam Chairman, until coming in to this role and I think
it's great that we are acknowledging the significant contribution of the Frew
family in naming the park after them.
But then also, Madam Chairman, in line with acknowledging the significant
contribution of Roy Emerson in naming the tennis centre after him and I'll hand
over the floor to debate.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 76 Acting Chairman:
Further debate? Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Yes, Madam Chairman. In listening to Councillor BOURKE, and I'm rising to
speak on item B. In listening to Councillor BOURKE, Madam Chairman, you
would think that this Council is undertaking these namings in a very sober and a
very serious way that it's given it considered thought. There's been consultation,
Council policy has been followed and so forth.
But, Madam Chairman, this submission is extraordinary and I would just say to
every councillor in the room, take another look at it. Now, I'll preface what I'm
about to say by saying I don't actually think it's Councillor BOURKE that stuffs
up here. I think this is another stuff up by the former chairperson, Councillor
Peter MATIC.
This is an extraordinary submission. It's doing two things. It is asking for a park
to be named Frew Park and it's asking for an area within that park to be named
as The Roy Emerson Tennis Centre. Now, I don't have a problem with either of
those names but what I have a problem with is this Council not following
Council policy? Neither of these two names have been the subject of public
consultation.
We can read in this submission and we see that well, the LORD MAYOR
wanted it named this way so that's how it's going to be named. Now, this Council
has held a park naming of mine for over a year when there's been a petition,
there's been support, there's been information about why it should be named in
such a way. It's been held up for over a year. Here are two names that haven't
gone through that same process.
Now, what's worse is clearly when they were looking at this recent suggestion
from Tennis Australia about naming part of the site at The Roy Emerson Tennis
Centre, they came across some sort of submission that perhaps was in draft form
by Peter MATIC with respect to the Frew Park naming, but has never, ever been
put up to this Council or to the committee to be approved.
As it says in here, a nomination came, D1723, was prepared and Councillor
Peter MATIC on 19 September supported the preparation of a submission for the
proposed name but it never happened. What happened? The chairman of the
Parks Committee nominates the name of a park, Frew Park, and a year and a half
later someone goes whoops, it didn't actually happen.
What on earth is going on in then Councillor MATIC's office and it doesn’t
surprise me because he's lost heaps of submissions in the Public and Active
Transport Committee too. So, Madam Chairman, here we have, here we have,
incompetence extraordinaire exposed in the Council's submission and he's
having a laugh over there, Madam Chairman, because I don't think he could do
anything else, having read this. It was a cracking read. I enjoyed it immensely.
We've had a name proposed by Councillor MATIC, Councillor MATIC stuffed
up his own park naming and couldn't get it right, forgot to take it up to the
committee of which he was the chair at the time, and a year and a half has past
and everyone's gone whoops, suddenly, we'd better name it Frew Park. Did we
do the requisite consultation? No. Did we seek community support? No. We've
rushed it through under the banner of something else to try and fix up a stuff up
and I see Councillor MATIC nodding his head.
It is a stuff up. This Council has been caught out. What I would say is this
exposes Council's duplicity when it comes to the naming of parks. While other
councillors have to jump through extraordinary, extraordinary hoops to have
their parks named, it's clear that it can be done at the stroke of a pen if the LORD
MAYOR wants it or Councillor MATIC wants it.
Now, I don't doubt that these people are worthy—before the abuse starts from
the other side—I don't doubt that either of these people are worthy to have a park
named after them but I what I would say, Madam Chairman, is this just shows
the level of incompetence, absolute incompetence, from the LNP opposite and
the fact that it's taken such a long time for their stuff up to be exposed and then
fixed because that's what this is, let's be clear about it.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 77 Let's be clear now. If we have any further delay with any park naming of mine I
will absolutely be taking this further. If this Council can avoid following its own
policy with respect to these matters, it can make sure it follows it properly when
other councillors put their park names up. Stuff up big time.
Acting Chairman:
Further debate? Councillor MATIC.
Councillor MATIC:
Madam Acting Chairman, I rise to speak in respect of item B and to speak on
this important item and the naming of this park and to actually provide some
context and to really speak about what the significance is of this as opposed to
the previous speaker and her lacklustre performance and her jibes.
You've got to wonder somehow how do you sleep at night, Councillor
JOHNSTON, through you, Madam Acting Chairman, with the kind of things
that come out of your mouth and the protestations, the lies and the—
Acting Chairman:
Just a moment, please, Councillor MATIC.
Councillor JOHNSTON, you have continued to defy my rulings and you have
continued to shout out across the Chamber and continued acts of disorder.
Warning – Councillor Nicole JOHNSTON
The Chairman then formally warned Councillor JOHNSTON that unless she desisted from interjecting and
interrupting the proper conduct of the meeting she would be suspended from the service of the Council for a
period of up to eight days. Furthermore, Councillor JOHNSTON was warned that, if she were suspended from
the service of the Council, she would be excluded from the Council Chamber, ante-Chamber, public gallery
and other meeting places for the period of suspension.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor MATIC, please continue.
Councillor MATIC:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman, for keeping the order.
Now, Madam Acting Chairman, Frew Park is, for the benefit of the Chamber,
the historical name given to a section of the park after Mr Frew for his
contribution to lawn tennis. This contribution was made as set out in the report
from 1910 to 1930. Upon his passing, a section of the park was actually named
informally by members of the Lawn Tennis Association in respect of his
enormous contribution.
Madam Chairman, when we conducted the consultation on Frew Park, we
actually sent out a newsletter that detailed this quite significantly on what the
previous name of that section of the park was called. There's the history of the
park, yes, Councillor MURPHY. It was actually done through consultation,
something that Councillor JOHNSTON probably wouldn't understand.
So, Madam Chairman, feedback was actually sought from the width and breadth
of the Toowong Ward on the naming and the continuation of the naming of the
park in respect of Frew Park, which was done and supported, Madam Acting
Chairman.
Now, in respect of the establishment of that name, I would certainly applaud
Councillor BOURKE for the formalisation of that name through Council's
Chamber and the proper respect that the park and this naming for Mr Frew
obviously deserves. It's wonderful to see that this side of the chamber respects
history and continues to make those proper representations for the broader
community and reflects the support that the broader community gives to park
namings, Madam Acting Chairman.
Now, Madam Acting Chairman, in respect of naming the tennis courts after Mr
Emerson, I couldn't think of a better result. Mr Emerson's contribution to tennis
in Australia is completely, I think, supported by all sides of the community,
Madam Chairman. It's quite obvious that when we have reinstated tennis courts
at the old tennis centre, which are desperately needed, can I say, Madam Acting
Chairman, in the western suburbs, that naming them after Mr Emerson is the
most appropriate thing that we can do.
I fully support the recommendations set down here and I'd like to thank
Councillor BOURKE for his leadership as chairman in getting these up and
running and making sure that this side of the Chamber continues to provide the
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 78 necessary respect to the history of our city in acknowledging the great history
that we have in lawn tennis. The contribution, Madam Acting Chairman, by
those that came before us to establishing that history and making sure that they,
as Mr Frew did, provided those opportunities, the very basis of lawn tennis in
Queensland, so that Mr Emerson and those that came after him were able to
enjoy.
Acknowledging Mr Emerson, whose enormous contribution to tennis, Madam
Acting Chairman, and equally so, as Mr Frew did, Mr Emerson through his hard
working commitment to tennis, has provided those opportunities for the next
generation to come. I wholeheartedly support this recommendation.
Councillor BOURKE:
Madam Chairman, I'm going to be very, very brief in summing up. Councillor
MATIC has put it very simply. He's dealt with all of the issues raised by those
on the other side of the chamber, Madam Chairman. All I can do is implore the
councillors on the other side of the Chamber to actually read the documentation
that's put in front of them, not selectively quote from it, not try and go off on
tangents, not try and use it for their own political purposes.
It says quite clearly there in the documentation that was put in front of all of us,
Madam Chairman, that this was known—previously named Frew Park in
recognition of the contributions by the Frews in the 1910 to 1930 period, Madam
Chairman, and we have simply continued that naming tradition for this block of
land. Having received a written formal submission from Tennis Australia, the
president of Tennis Australia, about naming the courts Roy Emerson Courts, we
have done the work to bring that forward.
I would also encourage all councillors to actually go and read the parks naming
policy, Madam Chairman. It's there for all to see. Submissions made by people
can be taken into account. Obviously Councillor MATIC quite clearly outlined
the level of community support that was there for this. He undertook, like a good
councillor does, the consultation that needs to be done to demonstrate and
support the naming of parks, Madam Chairman.
I say well done to you, Councillor MATIC, for being able to do that and then
obviously being able to stand up and so ably talk about the significant
contribution that was made by these individuals in the history of lawn tennis in
Brisbane and why it is a good thing to continue to name these parks thusly, of
Frew Park and Roy Emerson Courts, Madam Chairman, and I look forward to
opening those parks and those facilities with you and the LORD MAYOR and
the residents of your ward and residents of Brisbane to come down and enjoy
what is going to be probably one of the premier places to play tennis in the
southeast corner.
Acting Chairman:
I will now put the report.
Upon being submitted to the Chamber by the Chairman, the motion for the adoption of the report of the
Environment, Parks and Sustainability Committee was declared carried on the voices.
The report as follows
ATTENDANCE:
Councillor Matthew Bourke (Chairman), Councillor Fiona King (Deputy Chairman), and Councillors
Peter Cumming, Kim Flesser, Geraldine Knapp and Ryan Murphy.
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – THE VINEGAR FLY
517/2012-13
1.
Dennis Gannaway, Program Delivery Manager, Habitat Restoration and Partnerships, Natural
Environment and Water Sustainability Branch, attended the meeting to provide a presentation
on the vinegar fly. He advised that these flies, which were currently prevalent in Brisbane,
belong to the genus Drosophila. He went on to provide the information below.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 79 -
2.
Drosophila species are found all around the world. There are more species in the tropical
regions, but they are also found in deserts, cities, swamps, and alpine zones. Most species
breed in various kinds of decaying plant and fungal material, including fruit, bark, flowers
and mushrooms. Several Drosophila species, including D. melanogaster, D. immigrans, and
D. simulans, are closely associated with humans, and are often referred to as domestic
species.
3.
These and other species have been accidentally introduced around the world by human
activities, such as fruit transportation. The vinegar fly is also commonly found in genetics
laboratories around the world. This is probably the most studied of all animals (besides
humans) and has contributed greatly to scientific understanding of genetics. Its short life cycle
of only a couple of weeks makes it ideal for genetic research.
4.
The vinegar fly is not actually a fruit fly as it does not feed on fruit directly, just the yeasts
associated with rotting fruit and vegetation. Its larvae feed on the bacteria and yeast found in
rotting fruit.
5.
The current wet conditions across the city have provided the fly with ideal conditions for
feeding and breeding. There is no direct impact on the general community apart from the
nuisance factor, although the larvae can cause great problems for wineries and fruit-juice
producers.
6.
Ten actions that residents can take to reduce fly numbers are:
1.
cover fruit bowls or store fruit in the fridge
2.
discard overripe or rotting fruit and vegetables
3.
clean rubbish bins regularly
4.
make vinegar traps with a bowl and cling film
5.
move compost bins away from the house
6.
burn incense
7.
flush drains and sinks with ammonia or boiling water
8.
move potted plants or herbs outside
9.
put a household fan near vulnerable areas
10.
use fly spray (as a final resort only).
The current numbers vinegar flies will reduce as the weather cools down and the city dries
off.
7.
Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Mr Gannaway
for his informative presentation.
8.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE
REPORT.
ADOPTED
B
PARK NAMING – FORMAL NAMING OF THE EXISTING PARKLAND ON
MILTON ROAD, MILTON, AS ‘FREW PARK’, AND THE PROPOSED NEW
TENNIS CENTRE WITHIN THIS PARK AS THE ‘ROY EMERSON TENNIS
CENTRE’
161/540/567/88
518/2012-13
9.
The Executive Manager, Field Services Group, Brisbane Infrastructure Division, provided the
information below.
10.
Approval is sought for parkland on Milton Road (the old Milton Tennis Centre) to be
officially named ‘Frew Park’ in honour of Mr Robert Dickson Alison Frew, and for the
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 80 -
proposed new tennis centre within this park to be named the ‘Roy Emerson Tennis Centre’ in
honour of Mr Roy Emerson.
11.
On 28 August 2011, a resident wrote to Council requesting that the name ‘Frew Park’ be
reinstated for the newly acquired park at Frew Street, Milton. The land was previously named
‘Frew Park’ after Mr Robert Dickson Alison Frew when the land was owned by the
Queensland Lawn Tennis Association. Mr Frew was the president of the Queensland Lawn
Tennis Association from 1910 to 1930 and was the driving force behind the creation of the
Milton Tennis Centre.
12.
A nomination to name park number D1723 ‘Frew Park’ was prepared and Councillor Peter
Matic, Chairman of the Environment, Parks and Sustainability Committee, on
19 September 2011, supported the preparation of a submission for the proposed name to the
appropriate Council Standing Committee.
13.
In October 2011, the Lord Mayor also agreed that the name ‘Frew Park’ should be reinstated.
Information about the decision to reinstate the name was included in media releases and other
community engagement materials and the resident who made the request was advised of the
decision to reinstate the name Frew Park. There is, however, no record of a formal park
naming submission being made to the relevant Standing Committee, which is the
Environment, Parks and Sustainability Committee.
14.
On 9 January 2012, Mr Steve Healy, President of Tennis Australia, the governing body of
tennis in Australia, wrote to the Lord Mayor with a proposal to name the park at 315 Milton
Road, Milton, as the ‘Roy Emerson Tennis Centre’ to recognise Mr Emerson’s achievements
in Australian tennis. As a decision to retain the name ‘Frew Park’ had already been made by
that time, the Lord Mayor committed Council to investigating ways of honouring Mr Roy
Emerson in the design of the new park.
15.
Mr Emerson is widely recognised as one of Australia’s greatest tennis players, with 12 Grand
Slam singles titles, the highest for any Australian player and a world record for many years.
During his career, Mr Emerson played many games at Frew Park, Milton, including Davis
Cup Challenge Round matches against Mexico in 1962 and Spain in 1967. He won the
Australian Championships at Frew Park in 1964. Additional information about Mr Emerson’s
tennis career is submitted on file.
16.
The Establishment and Coordination Committee, on 14 January 2013, confirmed that naming
the tennis facility proposed for Frew Park the ‘Roy Emerson Tennis Centre’ would be a fitting
tribute to Mr Emerson. A public announcement of that decision was planned for
29 January 2013; however, the event was cancelled due to the severe weather conditions.
There are no immediate plans to reschedule the public announcement as Mr Emerson has now
returned to California.
Consultation
17.
All people consulted as part of the process agree that the name ‘Frew Park’ is appropriate for
this park, and that the ‘Roy Emerson Tennis Centre’ is an appropriate name for the proposed
tennis facility.
18.
The Executive Manager recommends as follows and the Committee agrees.
19.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT APPROVAL BE GRANTED TO:
(i)
NAME PARKLAND ON MILTON ROAD, FORMERLY THE SITE OF THE
MILTON TENNIS CENTRE, AND ADJACENT LAND ACQUISITIONS, AS
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 81 -
(ii)
(iii)
‘FREW PARK’ in accordance with Council Policy OS03 Naming Parks, Facilities
or Tracks within Brisbane Parks and Open Spaces Procedure
NAME THE PROPOSED TENNIS CENTRE PLANNED FOR THIS PARK
THE ‘ROY EMERSON TENNIS CENTRE’
that name and explanation signs be erected in the park.
ADOPTED
FIELD SERVICES COMMITTEE
Councillor David McLACHLAN, Chairman of the Field Services Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor
Norm WYNDHAM, that the report of that Committee held on 5 March 2013, be adopted.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor McLACHLAN.
Councillor McLACHLAN:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman. To item A and straight to the report, a
committee presentation on Green Star Concrete, I would just like to mention that
this is a very practical measure that benefits the environment. This is a practical
solution, a whole lot better than hand wringing and stunts and slogans and
shouting, that's to the LORD MAYOR, that he should “sign Kyoto now”.
These are practical measures being undertaken by this Administration to benefit
the environment, working diligently behind the scenes with suppliers to see what
can be undertaken in our procurement processes to ensure that we are delivering
a more sustainable future for the residents of Brisbane.
Green concrete is often talked about and it's simple to understand precisely what
we are talking about. Those in Field Services have been working closely with
our concrete suppliers, to make sure that we can get the mix right and the system
allows a star rating for green concrete, particularly where there is a reduction in
the use of Portland cement which has a high energy requirement to produce it.
So the reduction in Portland cement reduces the amount of energy, has better,
fewer, CO2 emissions. There are points awarded where recycled water is added
to the mix and also a point added when there are alternative aggregates such as
slag or manufactured sand used in the mix. So these are, I guess, to those
listening, perhaps process issues but they all add up to a contribution to the
environment, the reduction of greenhouse gases in to the environment as a
consequence.
These are practical solutions, practical measures. The LORD MAYOR is fully
behind it and Field Services are happy to support the LORD MAYOR's initiative
to ensure that when we can we use green concrete in the use of the kilometres,
hundreds of kilometres of footpaths being delivered by this administration.
Thank you, Madam Acting Chair.
Acting Chairman:
Further debate? Anything further, Councillor McLACHLAN? I'll now put the
report.
Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of the report of the Field Services Committee
was declared carried on the voices.
The report read as follows
ATTENDANCE:
Councillor David McLachlan (Chairman), Norm Wyndham (Deputy Chairman), and Councillors
Peter Cumming, Nicole Johnston, Kim Marx and Ian McKenzie.
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – GREEN STAR CONCRETE
519/2012-13
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 82 -
1.
Shane MacLeod, Construction Branch Manager, Field Services Group, attended the meeting
to provide the Committee information about the results from trials using Green Star concrete.
Mr MacLeod provided the information below.
2.
The industry standard for Green Star concrete identifies the product as being made of
reclaimed or recycled materials, including water, alternate aggregates, such as slag, or
manufactured sand. The Mat-4 Concrete Credit User Guide provides a maximum three-star
rating system for Green Star concrete.
3.
In late September 2012, Council invited tenders from the existing premix contract panel to
supply Green Star concrete. The tenders closed in October 2012 and the panel members
confirmed a number of two and three star concrete suppliers and their scheduled rates.
4.
A table showing the performance of the concrete mix used in the trial across suburban
footpaths was shown. The table included: supplier, rating, location, linear metres, usability
and consistency.
5.
The carbon emission savings achieved for Council, from the 20.2 cubic metres of Green Star
concrete used in these trials, was calculated as being 2505 kilograms. However, the use of
Green Star concrete does not result in any carbon credits for Council, as only gas and fuel
usage is carbon offset at present.
6.
Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Mr MacLeod
for his informative presentation.
7.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE
REPORT.
ADOPTED
BRISBANE LIFESTYLE COMMITTEE
Councillor Krista ADAMS, Chairman of the Brisbane Lifestyle Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor
Andrew WINES, that the report of that Committee held on 5 March 2013, be adopted.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor ADAMS.
Councillor ADAMS:
Thank you, Madam Chair. Our presentation last week in Lifestyle Committee
focused on active and healthy programs. We have got a lot of new initiatives and
programs that are out there to get Brisbane residents healthier and fitter, she says
with a head cold.
But we are blessed with a great climate in Brisbane which is conducive to the
active and healthy lifestyle and we have been proactively trying to implement
some strategies that appeals to all our Brisbane residents to get out there and
hence be fitter and healthier. The main programs we looked at last week was
active parks, goals, chill out, gone walking and our healthy connections.
In the interests of time, can I just ask councillors to make sure they look at the
chill out program as we come into the Easter holidays aimed at our 10 to 17 year
olds. It really has been growing and growing and growing over the last couple of
years. Some of the very popular ones lately are Circus for the Deaf and Hearing
Impaired and Boxing Bandits have been very, very popular.
So all our programs are free or very lost cost and every program is trying to be
spread right across every ward in Brisbane to make sure we get a greater
outreach to our community.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 83 Madam Chair, I just conclude by saying that you can go to the corporate website
to find out any information. We do have our active postcards and we still do the
gold brochure in a hard copy for our senior residents who are not so hands on
with the computer. In addition, we are looking at some new strategies with
Facebook and Yahoo online advertising and we are hoping to go from strength to
strength. I recommend the committee report.
Acting Chairman:
Further debate? Nothing further, Councillor ADAMS? I now put the report.
Upon being submitted to the Chamber by the Chairman, the motion for the adoption of the report of the
Brisbane Lifestyle Committee was declared carried on the voices.
The report read as follows
ATTENDANCE:
Councillor Krista Adams (Chairman), Councillor Andrew Wines (Deputy Chairman), and Councillors
Steven Huang, Vicki Howard, Victoria Newton and Steve Griffiths.
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION – ACTIVE AND HEALTHY PROGRAMS
520/2012-13
1.
Vanessa Fabre, Manager, Inclusive Communities, Brisbane Lifestyle Division, attended the
meeting to provide a presentation on Brisbane Lifestyle Division’s Active and Healthy
programs. She provided the information below.
2.
There are five programs within Council’s Active and Healthy initiative. These programs are
designed to encourage Brisbane residents of all walks of life to participate in physical activity
and healthy lifestyle choices. The Active and Healthy programs offered include: Active Parks,
GOLD (including GOLD ‘n’ Kids), Chillout, Gonewalking and Healthy Connections. All of
the programs, except for Healthy Connections, are fully-funded by Council.
3.
The types of activities on offer through these programs are:
adventure activities
arts and crafts
cycling
dancing
family activities
fitness and strength sessions
gardening and environmental classes
cooking and nutrition classes
kids activities
mind and body classes
sports
walking and running groups
water activities.
Active Parks
4.
The Active Parks program commenced in 2003 and aims to activate people and parks across
Brisbane. The program offers either free or low-cost activities for people of all ages, abilities
and skill levels at more than 50 local parks, waterways and pools across Brisbane.
GOLD
5.
The aim of the Growing Older and Living Dangerously (GOLD) program is to maintain
health for residents aged 50 years and over. It commenced in 1997 and GOLD ‘n’ Kids was
introduced in 2000. The GOLD program offers activities for older residents, while GOLD ‘n’
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 84 -
Kids activities are for seniors and children. All activities are either free or low-cost and cater
for all levels of ability.
Chillout
6.
Commencing in 1996, the Chillout program offers free or low-cost activities for residents
aged 10 to 17 that are run during the school holidays. The activities cater for all levels of
ability.
Gonewalking
7.
The Gonewalking program offers more than 80 free walk groups every week for residents of
all ages and commenced in 1998. The program is delivered by trained volunteers and walk
organisers from the Heart Foundation on behalf of Council and caters for all ages and levels
of ability.
Healthy Connections 2012 to 2014
8.
In 2012, Council was awarded funding as part of the Federal Government’s Healthy
Communities Initiative. This funding has been used to develop free or low-cost programs,
which address health and physical activity needs of the following community groups:
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders
culturally and linguistically diverse
recently or long-term unemployed.
9.
Following a number of questions from the Committee, the Chairman thanked Ms Fabre for
her informative presentation.
10.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE ABOVE
REPORT.
ADOPTED
FINANCE, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
Councillor Julian SIMMONDS, Chairman of the Finance, Economic Development and Administration
Committee, moved, seconded by Councillor Fiona KING, that the report of that Committee held on 5 March
2013, be adopted.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor SIMMONDS.
Councillor SIMMONDS:
Madam Chairman, just to thank the officers for their very interesting
presentation on the economic impacts of major events, the major events provided
to our city, and also to thank Brisbane Marketing and the team there for their
hard work. They've had a big week this week. I was there this morning for the
launch of the hotel investment piece of work and also they've launched the
international campaign today as well. So to thank respective teams in Brisbane
Marketing for their work in putting those together.
Acting Chairman:
Further debate? Nothing further, Councillor SIMMONDS? I will now put the
report.
Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion for the adoption of the Finance, Economic Development and
Administration Committee was declared carried on the voices.
The report read as follows
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 85 -
ATTENDANCE:
Councillor Julian Simmonds (Chairman), Councillor Angela Owen-Taylor (Deputy Chairman), and
Councillors Fiona King, Ryan Murphy, Shayne Sutton and Kim Flesser.
A
COMMITTEE PRESENTATION
THROUGH EVENTS
–
DRIVING
ECONOMIC
VALUE
521/2012-13
1.
Anne-Maree Moon, Director, Leisure Tourism, Brisbane Marketing and Jamisen Lander,
Manager, Major Events, Brisbane Marketing, provided a presentation to the Committee on
Driving Economic Value through Events. They advised of the information below.
2.
Events held in Brisbane help drive economic value through:
ticket sales
spending on accommodation by attendees
associated spending on dining, retail, extended tourist stays and transport.
This can lead to increased tourism, talent attraction and business activity for the city.
3.
Brisbane Marketing determines the economic impact of major events by using the Tourism
Research Australia formula (visitation source x days x average spend). Based on this formula,
major events delivered more than $105 million in economic value to Brisbane in 2011-12.
4.
An example of driving economic value through events was the Brisbane International Tennis
Tournament. Economic value was achieved through:
targeting local, intrastate, interstate and international marketing
using television, print media, outdoor, transit, digital and public relations
opportunities
Queen Street Mall activation events
strategically placing the Brisbane logo (reaching a cumulative televised audience of
3.2 million).
5.
Some of the other events included the National Rugby League All Stars, the 2012 Bledisloe
Cup (54,500 attendees adding $12.93 million economic value), the State of Origin and the
Brisbane Festival (attracting over one million attendees adding $23 million economic value).
6.
Conventions are also adding economic value and business activity to Brisbane. In the last
financial year, Brisbane achieved 439,920 delegate days which resulted in an estimated
economic impact of $266,591,520.
7.
The Chairman thanked Ms Moon and Ms Lander, for their informative presentation.
8.
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT COUNCIL NOTE THE INFORMATION IN THE ABOVE REPORT.
ADOPTED
CONSIDERATION OF NOTIFIED MOTION: SEQ Translink bus
network review
(Notified motions are printed as supplied and are not edited)
522/2012-13
The Acting Chairman of Council then drew the Councillors’ attention to the notified motion listed on the
agenda, and called on Councillor Milton DICK to move the motion. Accordingly, Councillor DICK moved,
seconded by Councillor Helen ABRAHAMS, the following motion:
'That this Council rejects the recommendations of the SEQ Translink bus network review that will see
users of public bus transport in Brisbane lose services.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 86 -
Further that the Lord Mayor and all Councillors support Brisbane residents who are opposing these
changes.'
Acting Chairman:
Is there any debate?
Councillor DICK:
Yes, Madam Chair. Look, I know we've had a long and lengthy debate and my
remarks will be very brief regarding this motion tonight because I do
acknowledge that after five days of silence from the LORD MAYOR, we did see
that broken today earlier with the urgency motion moved. It's a bit like the papal
election where the conclave has been meeting and then after five long days we've
seen a bit of smoke come up but more a spluttering of smoke.
Looking at Channel 7 tonight, we'll be seeing a lot more attacks on the Transport
Minister, Scott Emerson, after he was reeling and I would be after that news
story this evening.
Madam Chair, there's a couple of very quick points I want to put on the record
and we should invite Channel 7 every week to come to the Council meeting after
seeing the news tonight. Madam Chair, after viewing the notice of motion today,
I do want to place a few extra things on comment. We as a Council not only just
send a very clear message—
Acting Chairman:
Just a moment. Councillor BOURKE, I'm just having a little bit of difficulty
hearing Councillor DICK.
Councillor DICK:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chair.
We as a Council also need to show our support for Brisbane residents. We need
to not only negotiate, we need to push, we need to cajole. I certainly hope after
today's series of events the LORD MAYOR has organised a meeting with the
Transport Minister, that he's picked up the phone to Campbell Newman, that he's
demanded that he meet. I'm unaware of what's happened in the last couple of
days. Certainly I would hope that tonight we will hear an action plan of how to
actually fight the State Government on this.
Now that we have united to condemn the State Government as one Council
today, I acknowledge the LNP standing up for Brisbane ratepayers. It take them
a bit of cajoling but we did get there, where they've now joined and Councillor
MATIC, when I seconded the motion today, was more than happy to vote. I
would've liked a lot stronger motion myself.
I want to set the record on one thing that happened during this regarding the fare
increase. Councillor SIMMONDS said that when a notice of motion came to this
Council, Labor councillors didn't support it. We didn't criticise and condemn the
State Government for the 15 per cent fare rise. I don't know if we can table—I
will table this.
Transcript on 30 August, notice of motion moved by Councillor SIMMONDS,
seconded by Councillor WINES. Chairman, this was a criticism, direct criticism
to the then State Government, direct criticism of the fare increases. It was
misleading what Councillor SIMMONDS said when he said that we didn't
support this. On 30 August, Chairman, I now put this motion. All those in
favour, to the contrary no, the ayes have it. Division was called, the only
councillor who didn't vote was Councillor KNAPP who didn't make the division
and then it was recorded, this vote carried unanimously, the voting being 25 in
favour.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor DICK, just for clarity's purposes, 30 August in what year, thank you?
Councillor DICK:
Sorry, 2011.
Acting Chairman:
Thank you.
Councillor DICK:
So just so that we're clear, that is, Labor councillors criticising, coming out
against my own colleagues at the time. It was very important that—and I do that
because it shows there can when there is will and there's effort, it can be shown,
no matter what your political persuasion, you can actually stand up and be
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 87 counted and that's what this motion will also do; strengthen it, toughen it, make
sure that we send a message.
I want to be standing at rallies on the streets, meeting with residents, with LNP
councillors, with the LORD MAYOR, out in the media, making it clear that we
will not cop what the LNP State Government is ramming down Brisbane's
commuters' throats. We will say no, we will fight them, we will reject them, we
will stand up for the commuters of Brisbane.
I know Councillor MATIC will now, as a result of today, the condemnation
motion that we moved, criticising the LNP State Government. We need to move
to the next level. That's what this motion does tonight. We'll continue to fight,
we'll continue to agitate and we will make the LNP State Government listen
because what they are doing is cruel, unfair, unnecessary and will lead to further
pain and heartache on top of the cuts, on top of the sackings, that they've already
delivered for the people of Brisbane.
Acting Chairman:
Further debate? Councillor JOHNSTON.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
Yes, just very briefly on this motion, Madam Chairman. It wasn't lost on me that
the LNP councillors pulled a stunt this morning to bring their own motion in to
this place to debate the issue of the TransLink bus review. In my view, they did
this as a sort of an eleventh hour we'd better be seen to be doing something
because they were aware—
Acting Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON, to the motion, please?
Councillor JOHNSTON:
—because they were aware there was a notice of motion which had been
submitted last Thursday evening which was calling for action. I just want to read
the words of the motion in to—
Acting Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON, we are debating the motion before us. We are not
debating a previous motion that has already been debated ad infinitum today.
You either speak to the motion before us or I will sit you down.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
As I was saying, I would just like to read the words of the motion in to the
record, that this—
Acting Chairman:
Councillor JOHNSTON, I have just told you that we are debating the motion
before us.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
It's—what do you think I'm doing?
Acting Chairman:
We don't need the motion read in to the record. It is read and circulated on the
agenda. Get on with the debate on the motion, thank you.
Councillor JOHNSTON:
I'd like to and, Madam Chairman, I think the words of this motion are important,
Madam Chairman, and I would like my residents to know that this is what I'm
supporting tonight, that is, that this Council rejects the recommendations of the
Southeast Queensland TransLink bus network review that will see the users of
public bus transport in Brisbane lose services.
Secondly, further that the LORD MAYOR and all councillors support Brisbane
residents who are opposing these changes. I support this motion wholeheartedly.
Residents in my area, as we've heard today, are going to be hugely impacted by
the loss of services, Madam Chairman. I don't think that's good enough.
Secondly, I believe we should be doing more to support residents who will be
affected by these changes. I think this is actually probably the best motion I've
ever seen the Labor Party put up in the five years I've been a councillor and I'm
happy to support this motion and I certainly hope that the LNP will be
supporting it as well because we haven't had a speaker from that side.
If they are genuine about having concerns, they will support this motion and not
just vote it down along party lines and not have the guts to stand up and not
speak to it. So I hope, Madam Chairman, that we will have unanimous support
on this motion and we'll be able to send a clear message to our residents and to
George Street that this TransLink review is bad for the City of Brisbane.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor MATIC.
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 88 Councillor MATIC:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman. I rise to speak on the motion.
Madam Acting Chairman, I will be brief because what is discussed in this
motion was already discussed at great length this morning in our own motion
debate. This motion, Madam Chairman, doesn't properly reflect the width and
breadth of the motion that was put forward this morning. Of course, ALP
councillors put this up as a knee jerk political reaction but at the end of the day,
Madam Chairman, there is some merit in the words that they have put forward.
Certainly this motion itself does not properly encapsulate the full depth of what
the TransLink review has to deal with and the ALP councillors probably put this
up before they actually had the opportunity to review it or should I say,
Councillor DICK, his shadow probably wouldn't have understood the document
anyway.
But in respect of what is there, it is a very shallow motion, Madam Chairman,
but there is some merit in what is put there and I think at the end of the day, what
was encapsulated and put forward by our own side of the chamber far better
reveals the width and depth of the review itself.
In respect of what was there, Madam Chairman, could I simply say that there is
much work to be done. This motion that the ALP put forward is just the first step
in what this Administration's work is in representing the concerns of Brisbane
residents. Since, Madam Chairman, we've had great debate on both sides of the
Chamber on this.
523/2012-13
Motion be now put
It was moved by Councillor MATIC, seconded by Councillor Krista ADAMS, that the motion be now put.
Upon being submitted to the Chamber, the motion, that the motion be now put, was declared carried on the
voices.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor DICK, right of reply.
Councillor DICK:
Thank you, Madam Chair, and I'm very happy that I've been able to set the
agenda on this one and get the ball rolling.
Acting Chairman:
Order!
Councillor DICK:
Thank you, Madam Chair.
For the record, the LNP did not place a notice of motion on. The only councillors
who put a notice of motion on dealing with public transport were Labor
councillors. It's a fact. That's fine, you're embarrassed by it. Well, that's okay.
We still don't know what Councillor MATIC has actually written to TransLink
or what his submission was on behalf of the commuters of Brisbane.
We don't know whether the LORD MAYOR has picked up the phone to the
Transport Minister or whether Councillor MATIC, his own State member, is
actually bothered to meet with to outline those concerns. It's a big secret, it's a
big hidden agenda. We don't know. By listening to Councillor MATIC today,
who's had a terrible day in this Chamber, an absolute shocking day, saying well,
we sort of don't support it but there's some good things in it and we'll have to
wait and see and just, you never know.
Not once did Councillor MATIC talk about the bus cuts, talk about the service
delivery, talk about actually the congestion. At best, and I give it to Councillor
SCHRINNER, he's—I am sure on Friday drove this inside the party room
against resistance from his own colleagues. I acknowledge that he's the only
person who actually stood up and actually was a person of conviction. I know
there are public advocates, public transport advocates, over there, people like
Councillor MARX and people like Councillor HOWARD, who I know would
have fought tooth and nail to put this up and yourself, Madam Acting Chair.
You know, it's no secret that the talent is not put on the front bench and you had
to carry this load but, Madam Chair, I always watch—I always watch what's
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 89 going on in the dynamics. I know what's going on behind the scenes. I really do.
I do. I do.
Madam Acting Chair, in conclusion this is a serious issue. This is a serious—
well, it is a serious issue. Well, it's a serious issue that I am passionate about but
I know—well, Councillor McLACHLAN laughs. Well, you need to come out
and actually talk to residents and actually listen to what they've got to say and I
challenge any LNP State member to come with me. I'm intersected by four State
members, three are LNP, the member for Algester, the member for Sunnybank
and the member for Mount Ommaney.
I challenge all of those three MPs to sit down with me, to sit down with local
residents, look them in the eye, instead of hiding behind the Transport minister
and not actually fronting up. We've got a duty of care for the commuters of this
city and the ratepayers of this city. I know that we'll continue to keep fighting for
them and this motion sends a clear message once again to the state LNP
government, we will not cop the cut backs that they are planning.
Acting Chairman:
I'll now put the motion.
Motion put
Upon being submitted to the meeting the motion was declared carried on the voices.
Thereupon, Councillors DICK and ABRAHAMS immediately rose and called for a division, which resulted in
the motion being declared carried unanimously.
The voting was as follows:
AYES: 25 -
The Right Honourable the LORD MAYOR, Councillor Graham QUIRK,
DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor Adrian SCHRINNER, and Councillors
Krista ADAMS, Matthew BOURKE, Amanda COOPER, Vicki HOWARD,
Steven HUANG, Fiona KING, Geraldine KNAPP, Kim MARX, Peter MATIC,
Ian McKENZIE, David McLACHLAN, Ryan MURPHY, Angela OWEN-TAYLOR,
Julian SIMMONDS, Andrew WINES, and Norm WYNDHAM, and the Leader of
the OPPOSITION, Councillor Milton DICK, and Councillors Helen ABRAHAMS,
Peter CUMMING, Kim FLESSER, Steve GRIFFITHS, Victoria NEWTON, and
Nicole JOHNSTON.
NOES: Nil.
PRESENTATION OF PETITIONS:
Acting Chairman:
Councillors, are there any petitions? Councillor CUMMING.
Councillor CUMMING:
Thank you, Madam Chair. I have an e-petition to present which is calling for a
very large dog off-leash area to be retained at its existing size at Elanora Park at
Wynnum North.
Acting Chairman:
Further petitions? Councillor HOWARD.
Councillor HOWARD:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman. I have a petition on behalf of residents of
Fortitude Valley in regard to a noise complaint.
Acting Chairman:
LORD MAYOR?
LORD MAYOR:
Yes, thanks very much, Madam Chairman. I have a petition which is in relation
to a street in Sunnybank Hills. It's about a tree actually in that street, Madam
Chairman.
Acting Chairman:
Councillor McKENZIE.
Councillor McKENZIE:
Thank you, Madam Acting Chairman. I have a petition to present concerning a
crossing on Cavendish Road near the Coorparoo State School.
Acting Chairman:
Any further petitions?
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 90 -
524/2012-13
It was resolved on the motion of Councillor Ryan MURPHY, seconded by Councillor Victoria NEWTON, that
the petitions as presented be received and referred to the Committee concerned for consideration and report.
The petitions were summarised as follows:
File No.
Councillor
Topic
CA13/155272
Peter Cumming
CA13/155442
Vicki Howard
CA13/141985
Lord Mayor Graham
Quirk
Ian McKenzie
Requesting that the Elanora Park dog-off leash area be retained
at its existing size
Requesting that Council apply restrictions to the operations
conducted by the Alfred and Constance Nightclub at
130 Constance Street, Fortitude Valley
Requesting the removal of a large gum tree on the corner of
Peppercorn and Snowberry Streets, Sunnybank Hills
Requesting a 40km/h School Zone and a safe, marked crossing
area for children and local residents on Cavendish Road,
between Old Cleveland Road and Leigh Street, Coorparoo
CA13/154839
GENERAL BUSINESS:
Acting Chairman:
Are there any matters of general business? DEPUTY MAYOR.
Motion that the meeting conclude
525/2012-13
The DEPUTY MAYOR, Councillor SCHRINNER, moved, seconded by Councillor MURPHY, that the meeting
conclude. Upon being submitted to the meeting the motion was declared carried on the voices.
Acting Chairman:
I declare the meeting closed.
QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN:
(Questions of which due notice has been given are printed as supplied and are not edited)
Submitted by Councillor Victoria Newton (received on 7 March 2013)
Q1.
Could the CEO please advise the total costs to date for the Council’s NIO project?
Q2.
In relation to the Council’s decision to outsource the provision of managed ICT services, the Council’s
Stores Board Submission claims:“Direct cost savings in this outcome when compared to the Council current ‘as is’ mode is $7.4m
(transition cost excluded) over five years of which $5.22m is to be retained within the NIO budget as a
contingency.”
Could the CEO please advise:a.
What is the approximate total amount Council may be required to pay in redundancy
payments for the loss of the 50 to 55 full-time equivalent Council positions?
b.
What components may contribute to the “transitional costs” in relation to this project?
c.
What are the expected “transitional costs” for this project?
d.
For what purpose may the $5.22m contingency costs be used for?
Q3.
In relation to the recent Council decision to enter into a contract with HCL to outsource Council IT
services (Provision of Managed ICT Services), could the CEO please advise:
a.
Has HCL made a commitment to establish an office in Brisbane as a result of the awarding of
this contract? If so, are their any caveats to this commitment?
b.
Are any labour components of the Council contract to HCL to be completed in an overseas
country? If so, what type of work will be completed overseas?
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 91 c.
d.
If some labour components are to be completed overseas, in which country/countries will that
occur?
Has Council ensured in the contract with HCL, that minimum employment wages and
conditions apply in any overseas countries where Council work will to be performed?
ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN
GIVEN:
(Answers to questions of which due notice has been given are printed as supplied and are not edited)
Submitted by Councillor Victoria Newton (from meeting on 5 March 2013)
Q1.
Can the CEO please advise of the total annual cost to council of running the City Hopper Ferry Service
in 2011/12 financial year?
Q2.
Can the CEO please advise the total annual subsidy received by Council from Translink to run the City
Hopper Ferry Service in 2011/12 financial year?
Q3.
Can the CEO please advise how many people used the City Hopper Service in the 2011/12 financial
year?
Q4.
Can the CEO please advise what was the total annual cost to council of running the Bulimba Cross
River Ferry Service in 2011/12 financial year?
Q5.
Can the CEO please advise what is the total annual subsidy received by Council from Translink to run
the Bulimba Cross River Ferry Service in 2011/12 financial year?
Q6.
Can the CEO please advise how many people used the Bulimba Cross River Ferry Service in the
2011/12 financial year?
Q7.
Can the CEO please advise what is the anticipated total annual cost to council of running the City
Hopper Ferry Service in the 2012/13 financial year?
Q8.
Can the CEO please advise what is the anticipated total annual subsidy expected to be received by
Council from Translink to run the City Hopper Ferry Service in 2012/13 financial year?
Q9.
Can the CEO please advise what is the anticipated number of people expected to use the City Hopper
Service in the 2012/13 financial year?
Q10
Can the CEO please advise what is the anticipated total annual cost to council of running the Bulimba
Cross River Ferry Service in the 2012/13 financial year?
Q11.
Can the CEO please advise what is the anticipated total annual subsidy expected to be received by
Council from Translink to run the Bulimba Cross River Ferry Service in 2012/13 financial year?
Q12.
Can the CEO please advise what is the anticipated number of people expected to use the Bulimba Cross
River Ferry Service in the 2012/13 financial year?
A1 to A12. Information being compiled.
Submitted by Councillor Victoria Newton (from meeting on 18 September 2012)
Q14.
Can the CEO please please explain the decrease in operating expense of $ 1,064,000 listed on page 14
of Part B of the First Budget Review service 1.6.1.1?
A14.
-
Depreciation to align with expected year end outcome;
lower than anticipated cost of disposal for landfill;
impact of budget review on Imputed tax;
Internal transfers.
Submitted by Councillor Victoria Newton (from meeting on 19 February 2013)
Q3.
Could the CEO please advise how many people visited each of the following Council pool facilities for
each of the financial years of 2008/09; 2009/10; 2010/11; and 2011/12 (where the pools were in place
as some were not yet built):
Acacia Ridge Leisure Centre
Bellbowrie Pool
Carole Park Pool
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 92 -
Centenary Pool
Chermside Pool
Colmslie Pool
Dunlop Park Pool
Hibiscus Sports Complex
Ithaca Pool
Jindalee Pool
Langlands Park Pool
Manly Pool
Mt Gravatt East Aquatic Centre
Musgrave Park Pool
Newmarket Pool
Runcorn Pool
Sandgate Pool
Spring Hill Baths
Valley Pool
Yeronga Park Pool.
A3.
Brisbane City Council Swimming Pool Admissions 2008-2012
Admissions
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
Acacia Ridge
34,413
30,815
22,312
Bellbowrie
27,197
31,584
12,833
Carole Park
6862
6527
5559
Centenary
169,814
162,924
149,182
Chermside
97,395
129,231
112,440
Colmslie
135089
Dunlop Park
95,360
110,104
99,425
Hibiscus
91,478
74,972
69,776
Ithaca
26,817
25,983
35,471
Jindalee
65,924
73,753
38,880
Langlands
103,469
102,746
102,598
Manly
33,451
36,633
49,190
Mt Gravatt East
21,262
91,266
107,138
Musgrave
59,898
68,836
54,717
Newmarket
132,362
127,011
152,511
Runcorn
15,564
91,532
97,786
Sandgate
74,476
60,498
71,758
Spring Hill
16,503
21,809
25,325
Valley
98,430
112,241
82,620
Yeronga
161,582
194,862
193,941
Note: Some pool sites were affected during the January 2011 flood event.
Locations
2011-12
27,124
35,858
4896
142,118
116,907
148636
91,446
80,161
26,495
59,996
113,721
66,109
106,399
60,671
162,126
118,362
79,481
26,523
118,280
214,252
Submitted by Councillor Victoria Newton (from meeting on 5 February 2013)
Q2.
Could the CEO please provide a breakdown of the total Council budget for the Legacy Way tunnel
project.
A2.
Capital expenditure(million)
$
1,547.80
Revenue (million)
$
510.1
Q3.
Could the CEO please advise if roadside toll-cost signage will be provided for motorists using the
Legacy Way toll tunnel.
A3.
On 13 November 2012 Council passed a motion to review signage relating to toll facilities under the
control of Brisbane City Council. As part of this review Council is looking at current signage in place
on toll roads and will consider issues such as safety, legibility, and accessibility of pricing information.
An initial review is currently underway and is expected to be completed by the end of the financial
year. The final outcome from the review will include recommendations for Legacy Way .
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]
- 93 RISING OF COUNCIL:
6.56pm.
PRESENTED:
and CONFIRMED
CHAIRMAN
Council officers in attendance:
Andrew Langford (Team Leader, Council and Committees Support)
David Redding (Council and Committees Support Officer)
Billy Peers (Personal Support Officer to the Lord Mayor and Council Orderly)
[4399 (Ordinary) meeting – 12 March 2013]