From: Margzehntner@aol.com
Sent: Monday, 19 January 2004
4:12 PM
To: ECITA, Committee (SEN)
Subject: Kyoto Protocol
Ratification Bill 2003 [No.2] - Committee 4 March 2004
Margaret Zehntner
PO Box 62
Kuranda Qld 4872
4 January
2004
Michael McLean, Secretary
Senate Environment, Communications,
Information Technology and Arts
Legislation Committee
Parliament House,
Canberra, ACT, 2600
Email: ecita.sen@aph.gov.au
Dear Sir.
I am
writing in support of the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol Ratification Bill
2003 [No.2] and urge the Senate's Environment, Communications, Information
Technology and Arts References Committee to advise that it is in the interest of
Australia and its future sustainability to so recommend. As a private
citizen, mother and grandmother I would be happy to testify to the Senate
Committee as I feel strongly that Australia is in danger of missing out on
economic and employment opportunities and choosing instead high cost
unsustainable technologies and options.
My personal experiences highlight
the discontinuity between the Federal Government's rhetoric on voluntary
reduction of greenhouse emissions with the planning and projects undertaken by
various Government Departments and industry. Thus are quite
legal but ecologically suicidal process not only perpetuated but locked firmly
into future systems.
Our children and grandchildren will face an
even greater cost to undo current shortsighted developments than if we are to
plan and act now for a sustainable future. Confronted by confused
and confusing messages from a government in thrall to the fossil fuel and mining
lobbies, it becomes impossible for industry to plan and invest with
confidence. In the short term investment is stultified as industry leaders
recognize they face an inevitable backflip of policy at some future, desperate
time. This will come at far higher cost than gradual planning and
development for sustainability
Let me give an example from my current
situation. The Main Roads Department of Queensland is currently
planning $500 million upgrade of the Kuranda Range road, about 12 kms,
most of this through Wet Tropics World Heritage rainforest. Expected to take 10
years to construct, the road planners proudly point to an increase in traffic
from 6,500 to 40,000 vehicles per day, an increased speed limit of 95 kph, 4
lanes (3 times the width of the rainforest currently cleared ) and double-bogey
trucks. Bridges over wildlife corridors and a noise barrier for
Kuranda village are offered to mitigate environmental requirements and
concerns.
There appears to be no recognition that such an increase in
vehicular traffic in totally at odds with the need to reduce vehicular
emissions. There is no consideration of improving public transport or of
upgrading the existing rail for freighting much that is now trucked. There
is no consideration of the shortsightedness of putting housing developments in
fragile, drought affected areas that lack any infrastructure other than the
proposed road. There is no mention that the projected growth figures
are outdated and no longer reliable. There is no mention of enforcing
current speed limits, the flouting of which is widespread and life threatening
for all road users. Thus are people locked into total dependence on
long-distance, private-vehicle transport.
There is a disregard for
improving the already inadequately resourced services in existing centers. One
small example. Kuranda has no swimming pool. There is no
access to or safe swimming place in the river close to the town. Many high
school children are unsure if they can swim. [In Australia, 2004, this borders
on criminal negligence. ] There is no high school aquatics program as bussing
children to Mareeba is too costly. Many of these children are
Aboriginal with little or no access to transport. A 4-lane highway will be
of little benefit to them. A pool could ensure all Kuranda children are
safe, strong swimmers and reduce range road traffic as better-off families now
commute to access swimming lessons for their children.
The cost of the
proposed range road upgrade will be at the expense of improving local
infrastructure and services. Only those with fast vehicles and the road
transport companies will be advantaged by what is in effect a $500 million
subsidy to the fossil fuel and automobile industries. Significant
numbers of our community, especially children, the aged and Aboriginal groups,
will be disadvantaged further. With minor, less costly improvements such
as some additional overtaking lanes and the use of speed cameras, the present
road is more than adequate.
This one local example highlights the
increasing discontinuity between the direction Australia needs to be heading and
the quite legal planning and development actually taking place. We, the
citizens of Australia, need a clear, unambiguous direction from our Federal
government. We need a vision of a sustainable future for our children and
grandchildren. We need a government committed to sustainability through
legislation. We need ratification of the Kyoto Protocol to be the
first step on this journey.
Yours sincerely, Margaret
Zehntner