Page: 5784
| Station | 7.00–
8.00am | 7.30–
8.30am | 8.00–
9.00am | 8.30–
9.30am | 3.30–
4.30pm | 4.00–
5.00pm | 4.30–
5.30pm | 5.00–
6.00 | 5.30–
6.30pm |
| Chatswood | 10 | 13 | 12 | 10 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 11 |
| St Leonards | 10 | 13 | 12 | 10 | 10 | 10 | 11 | 13 | 11 |
| Nth Sydney | 11 | 14 | 14 | 12 | 13 | 15 | 14 | 12 | 12 |
______
The Hon. J. H. JOBLING: As honourable members will see, a maximum of 13 trains per hour is currently scheduled through St Leonards and Chatswood at peak hour. The EIS transport background paper states that "the number of trains over the two-hour peak on the North Shore line will rise by three by the year 2006" when the Parramatta rail link comes into operation. The EIS states that "10 trains per hour are planned for the Parramatta rail link at peak hour". Given that the trains are timetabled with a minimum three-minute headway for safety, the theoretical maximum number of trains that can cross the Harbour Bridge is 20. It is optimistically assessed that the maximum number of passenger-carrying trains that can actually cross the Harbour Bridge is 90 per cent of the theoretical maximum, which is 18. This is to allow for the normal mix of express and all stations trains which cannot be evenly spaced, hence the difficulty of co-ordinating services from different lines.
The EIS claim that only two trains will have to terminate at Chatswood therefore becomes highly questionable. On a very technical argument there is great doubt as to what will happen and whether the bridge can handle this, and the quadruplication of the line will be a major problem. If one were to look at the morning peak hour on the Y-link option, depending on demand, some trains on the North Shore line heading south may be routed direct to Parramatta along the Parramatta rail link for travellers wishing to travel west. The North Shore line capacity would be increased. The evening peak hour runs into the same problem. Taking out the existing trains, only 3½ trains would be able to service the Parramatta rail link directly from the city. Rather than all the remaining 6.5 Parramatta rail link trains having to commence at Chatswood, the Y-link option would allow trains to start from both Chatswood and St Leonards. Clearly, this would relieve a great deal of overcrowding.
All these matters show that the environmental impact statement has not correctly and properly addressed the options. The evaluation of the patronage of these services needs to be examined. The work force at St Leonards is calculated at 38,000 and increasing to 45,000 in 2020, compared to 22,000 at Chatswood and increasing to 35,000. The conclusion is that St Leonards is a higher trip generator than Chatswood. Further, in a more recent development, I understand that Lane Cove Council announced its intention to establish a major bus-rail-bike interchange with expanded bus routes and implementation of a regional bus route at St Leonards. That matter needs to be considered. The Chatswood option, which would link with the Chatswood bus interchange, can no longer claim a specific advantage over the St Leonards option in relation to a bus interchange. A line must be built.
I will not take up the time of the House with other points, as I hope that the amendment I will move shortly will be accepted. I am concerned about an article that appeared in the Sydney Morning Herald of 22 May under the headline "An oasis of quiet saved in a political trade-off". It would be excellent if Browns Waterhole is added to a national park. However, if the writer of the article is correct and the Greens and the Government have done a swap—a pond for a bridge—as a solution to the long-term problem that has vexed both parties, under what terms and conditions was the deal struck? What effect would such a deal have on a project to extend the F3 to the M2, and whether that is underground? I am concerned that the deal for not going under Lane Cove National Park is to construct a large bridge over the national park because, frankly, until the environmental impact statement is properly examined it is premature to be doing such a deal.
The Hon. C. J. S. Lynn: Surely the Greens wouldn't do a deal like that.
The Hon. J. H. JOBLING: I am sure the Greens will explain if there is any substance to the claim, and I am sure the Minister will explain the Government's reasoning for the deal, the benefits of it and the political trade-off.
The Hon. C. J. S. Lynn: It would certainly destroy any claim the Greens had to the political moral high ground.
The Hon. J. H. JOBLING: Indeed. It raises an extraordinarily large number of interesting questions.
The Hon. C. J. S. Lynn: Surely the Minister wouldn't have done a deal like that.
The Hon. J. H. JOBLING: A deal may well have been done, and I am sure the Minister will explain that in his reply. I look forward to that with interest. Also, I am sure my colleague Ms Lee Rhiannon will put her point of view. I do not desire to verbal her; I simply want to know what happened and why. Browns Waterhole is an excellent addition to a national park. I have a number of questions about funding for the project. The Government does not seem to be providing funding to the National Parks and Wildlife Service. Clearly, if this project is to be effective and workable, the Government will have to provide additional funding. A simple way to get answers to these questions is to conduct a short, sharp inquiry into the proposed rail bridge in Lane Cove National Park. Before honourable members say that the Opposition does not support this project, I make it clear that we do support this project. When I say "short, sharp" my intention is that the report will be tabled by 20 June this year.
The Hon. C. J. S. Lynn: They would need to do that to answer those serious allegations.
The Hon. J. H. JOBLING: Indeed, and that is why I will move an amendment. I move:
That the question be amended by omitting the words "now read a second time." and inserting instead:
"referred to General Purpose Standing Committee No. 4 for inquiry and report in relation to the proposed rail
bridge in Lane Cove National Park.
2. That the committee report by Tuesday 20 June 2000.
I hope that such an inquiry will allay my concerns and fears.
The Hon. C. J. S. Lynn: And it will help the Greens clear their names against this slur.
The Hon. J. H. JOBLING: If that is so, I concur with my colleague's view. An inquiry would not delay this proposed 27-kilometre rail link project, which is worth between $1.4 billion and $2 billion. The rail-link option of new stations is better suited, would result in more people using the rail system, would increase the number of trains using the line each hour, and would relieve much of the pressure on the main line, which, as I said, would need to quadruple. The improvement in public transport must be supported, and the Opposition does support it. I am simply expressing the concerns of the people who have written to me, spoken to me on the phone or come to see me. They are concerned that the Government suddenly wishes to put a very large rail bridge, with the noisy trains that will be traversing it regularly, across one of the most popular national parks in Sydney. It will destroy the ambience of the park.
I hope the Government will ensure that it satisfied all the parties, including those living in the area who are justifiably concerned about the proposed train line, as they are concerned about a large expressway or freeway and the noise it would generate. My amendment would enable the Government to answer our questions, and any necessary amendments could be made before the project commences. At the end of the day we would gain what we want—that is, the link we originally proposed and which we support. I ask honourable members to support my amendment to refer this matter to General Purpose Standing Committee No. 4 to enable our questions to be answered.
Ms LEE RHIANNON [3.47 p.m.]: I have great delight in supporting this bill. As honourable members know, the Greens have a long and proud history of fighting for public transport. Indeed, during the five years that my colleague the Hon. I. Cohen has been in this place, and during his many years of environmental activism, he has worked hard to increase the number of public transport projects. He has brought that important work to the Parliament, and dividends are now flowing from that. Sydney is desperate for new public transport. This project is most important for many reasons because it offers a win-win situation: a win for the environment and a win for public transport. The horrible brown smudge we see across Sydney's horizon day in and day out would start to dissipate as the project came on line.
This $1.4 billion project represents the largest expansion of Sydney's rail network ever undertaken. Some 27 kilometres of rail will link Parramatta to Chatswood via Epping. Altogether, it will add five new stations to the current network and upgrade seven existing stations. The Parramatta rail link is due to open in 2006. I am only in this place for one term, and the year 2006 will be near the end of that term. I look forward to participating in the opening of the project because it will be a most significant event. It will be good to have a bipartisan celebration of such an important public transport project.
The environmental benefits of the rail link will be enormous. It will dramatically improve public transport access to several important centres, including Parramatta, the University of Western Sydney at Rydalmere, Epping, Macquarie University, the Ku-ring-gai campus of the University of Technology, Sydney, and Chatswood. People who live along the proposed route will, for the first time, be able to have access to the entire CityRail network. For many years now the percentage of trips made in Sydney on public transport has been falling in comparison to the percentage of trips made by private car. This shift has been driven by government policy. The construction of new freeways and motorways has proceeded apace whilst public transport has simply languished. New suburbs have been created where residents have no choice but to drive.
As honourable members would be aware, in many suburbs, particularly those on the outskirts of Sydney, families need at least one car, and in many cases two cars, just to carry out life's basic functions. In effect, we have seen a shift away from public transport because people have developed a reliance on cars. This trend has serious and far-reaching consequences for Sydney's air quality. Declining air quality impacts heavily on the health of all of us. Some people suffer enormously, particularly young children, the elderly and people who have a disposition to various illnesses. The latest figures for the number of asthma sufferers in Sydney are alarming. It is estimated that one in five children in our primary schools suffers from asthma. When I went to school in the 1950s and 1960s it was rare to know anyone who suffered from asthma. These days it is very common, and those of us who have children always have friends whose children suffer from asthma. This is another reason why important public transport projects such as these are urgently needed.
The Parramatta rail link has the potential to turn this situation around—that is, the community's increasing dependency on cars. As a massive new addition to Sydney's public transport infrastructure, it will take large numbers of cars off Sydney's roads. The link will drive a shift back to public transport, a shift that our city desperately needs if we are to enjoy it to its full and wonderful capacity. Apart from the environmental benefits of the link, new public transport infrastructure brings enormous social benefits. For the first time, people from western Sydney and the Blue Mountains will have access to universities such as Macquarie University and the Ku-ring-gai campus of the University of Technology. Those university campuses are currently heavily biased towards students from the affluent suburbs on Sydney's North Shore, because that is the only way that people can easily access the campuses. This opening up of access to educational opportunities is one of the greatest benefits to flow from the rail link.
In addition to access to education, the rail link will open up access to the growing commercial centres of North Ryde and Chatswood. North Ryde is at the heart of Sydney's own Silicon Valley, a rapidly growing area of highly paid employment in the information technology field. Once again, access to this area will have major benefits for the people of western Sydney and the Blue Mountains. On a more general note, public transport is a fairer and more equitable mode of transport. Much of our society is excluded from travel by car, including those who are too young or too old to hold a driver's licence and those who are unable to afford the cost of buying or running a car. Car-based travel excludes great swathes of our society. Public transport, on the other hand, provides for everyone. This is another reason why the Greens, since the party was formed, have fought so passionately for public transport. Public transport does not exclude people on the basis of age and it is much less likely to exclude people on the basis of their ability to pay.
The Greens acknowledge that the rail link comes with some environmental cost. However, we believe that this cost is a hundred times outweighed by the environmental benefits that will flow. The proposed route will require a small area, about 1.9 hectares, to be excised from the Lane Cove National Park near Fullers Bridge. Once construction is complete, much of this area will once again be available for public use—that is, the area under and around the bridge. I note that last night the Leader of the Opposition acknowledged that the area was formerly used as an artillery range, and I also understand that parts of the area have been used as an orchard. Much of the area to be excised is not bushland at all but is a cleared and grassed area.
The Hon. C. J. S. Lynn: It hasn't stopped you people from turning some of it into wilderness.
Ms LEE RHIANNON: I urge Coalition members to listen so that they may learn about how the system is working and the benefits that will flow from the project. The Government has given clear and repeated assurances that the area of affected bushland will be regenerated and remediated to the highest possible standard.
The Hon. J. H. Jobling: With a bridge and a train going through, the ambience is shot!
Ms LEE RHIANNON: I was a botanist in previous jobs and had a close association with bush regeneration. I am therefore aware that extraordinary achievements can be gained from bush regeneration and that it can restore an area to a point where it is very hard to distinguish it from original bushland. For the record, the decision to support this small area being excised from the park was not an easy one for the Greens. The issue was debated at length within our internal party processes and different points of view were presented. The end product of the Greens' democratic decision-making process was the position that the Greens are presenting in this debate.
The Greens are far from alone in believing that the proposed route is justified on environmental grounds and that the rail link is a tremendous and much-needed project. Many environmental organisations have indicated their support for the Greens position on this issue. Friends of the Earth, Eco-Transit, Action for Public Transport, the Coalition of Transport Action Groups, the transport committee of the Nature Conservation Council and the Blue Mountains Conservation Society are just some of the groups that have written to the Greens to indicate their support for the work the Greens have negotiated with the Government on.
The Greens believe that the proposed route of the rail link is justified on environmental and social grounds, so long as certain conditions are met. The primary condition is that a larger area of bushland be added to Lane Cove National Park than is being taken away, and that the land be of equal or higher ecological value. Some weeks ago when the Greens formulated this position, we presented our conditions to the Government. I am happy to say that the Government responded to our party's position positively. The Greens will move an amendment to the bill to add an excellent parcel of land, known as Browns Waterhole, to the park. The Government has indicated a willingness to support the Greens amendment.
In recent days confusion has arisen about the nature of the Greens dealings with the Government on this matter. I wish to make the position clear. The Greens have a policy on the rail link, as I have just outlined, and I have detailed how the policy was formulated. The policy was presented to the Government, and the Government indicated a willingness to adopt and support elements of it. Unfortunately the Government has not come to the party on all aspects. The Greens, in association with other environmental groups, will continue to campaign regarding the need to have a boost in the budget for Lane Cove River National Park.
The Hon. C. J. S. Lynn: So you did a deal? You did a grubby deal. You sold out on your principles.
Ms LEE RHIANNON: No. You are a walking tragedy! The Coalition is desperate. Now that its support is below 30 per cent of the vote, it knows no bounds. The Coalition is really hard up and does not know how to proceed. Through this process the Greens have also won a victory for urban bushland right next to the Fullers Bridge site.
The Hon. C. J. S. Lynn: You are a disgrace to the people you are supposed to represent. People are going to suffer for years as a result of the grubby deal you've done.
Ms LEE RHIANNON: The Coalition is desperate. Now that its percentage of the vote is less than 30 per cent, it is really hard up. The University of Technology Sydney [UTS] owns a large area of high-quality bushland at its Ku-ring-gai campus. This is another area in which the environment has had a win. Throughout negotiations between the Greens and the University of Technology Sydney, the bushland has been the subject of sustained community efforts over several years to have the area made subject to a protective conservation agreement that will give the bushland the equivalent of national park status. Although UTS was initially responsive to the idea when it was put forward by the community, in recent months it has backed away from the conservation agreement.
There is widespread and well-justified concern both in the local community and among Greens over the construction of a train station, UTS Ku-ring-gai, which could eventually lead to higher levels of development in the area and the consequent loss of bushland. When Professor Tony Blake, Vice-Chancellor of UTS, wrote to me last week seeking Greens support for the rail link, I wrote back and expressed concern. I am happy to announce that in subsequent correspondence, Professor Blake committed UTS to enacting the conservation agreement by the end of this year. As a result, 5½ hectares of high-quality bushland—which is the habitat for the endangered red crown toadlet—will be locked in and protected. What a significant achievement!
Pursuant to sessional orders business interrupted.