Skip to content Skip to main navigation

News

Get a new bike from $50 per week

Public transport to address cost of living pressures?

By johnboy 8 September 2011 43

Following on from Zed’s cost of living spray this morning the Greens’ Amanda Bresnan is asking what he plans to do about transport costs:

“Today Mr Seselja pointed to ABS statistics showing the high costs to Canberrans of fuel and transport,” said Greens Transport spokesperson, Amanda Bresnan MLA.

“This is absolutely true, and it is a real problem. But Mr Seselja and the Government both ignore the real meaning of these statistics and are not pushing for investments that can save Canberrans on transport costs.

“The statistics show that current policies are locking Canberrans into car ownership and car usage because of poor transport planning and a lack of alternative options. This is very expensive and will only become expensive.

“The approximate average time that a resident of Canberra has to work in order to pay for their cars is 550 hours a year, or 1 and ½ hours every day of the year.


What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
43 Responses to
Public transport to address cost of living pressures?
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newst
dvaey 7:13 pm 10 Sep 11

Aeek said :

FACT: Pedestrians pay no specific taxes for the infrastructure that allows them to commute all over Canberra.

FACT:
1) Access to a footpath in the ACT is a right, not a privellige.
2) There is a legal difference between a footpath and a public roadway, as above.
3) The government cant control your access to a footpath. They cant stop you from commuting on the footpath for not paying due fees, but they can stop you from commuting on the highway for not paying them.

dungfungus 5:07 pm 10 Sep 11

Postalgeek said :

Ok, before we start, please read the definition below. Then review what you’ve written and provide something that isn’t, you know, the vibe of the thing.

fact |fakt|
noun

%u2022a thing that is indisputably the case.
%u2022 (usu. facts) a piece of information used as evidence or as part of a report or news article.
%u2022 chiefly (Law) the truth about events as opposed to interpretation.

So, for example, say you were to raise the issue of Ambulance Levies. You would go to the ACT Revenue Office site and read the following:
The Ambulance Levy is payable each month by private health insurance companies to offset the cost of providing ambulance services in the Territory. The levy is calculated on the number and type of private heath insurance contributions.
and then you might cite your source – http://www.revenue.act.gov.au/other_levies_and_taxes/ambulance_levy
And it would be reasonable for you to claim it was a FACT.

Something like:

Cyclists pay no specific taxes for the infrastructure that allows them to commute all over Canberra (if they are fit enough and have time to spare). Not even the ambulance levy added to registration fees that all ACT motorists pay. Yet they appear to be users of ambulances more than motorists do.

is not a FACT.

It is unsupported and you could’ve sourced it from anywhere, such as your arse. Saying something ‘appears’ to be the case does not make it a fact. Give me some evidence and then you’ll be cooking.

For another example, had you looked up Consolidated Revenue Fund, you would understand that all monies paid to government go to, well, a consolidated revenue fund. The money you pay for registration does not go to roads. It goes to the CRF. It may then be used for health, or a public servant’s remuneration package. Or it might be spent on roads. Likewise, the ample land tax I pay may end up being used to fix a pothole (generally not created by cyclists).

I know it’s frustrating, but if you go off and do some research and cite some evidence you might actually sound informed.

You have pointed out an error about “Ambulance Levy” that I made. I apologise – I got confused with terminology that the ACT RTA uses namely Road Rescue Fee $16.00 (silly me, I assumed this would mean an ambulance) and Road Safety Contribution $2.00.
You will find this billing information on a motor vehicle registration certificate. It doesn’t apply to pushbikes so my claim that cyclists contribute nothing still stands.
I don’t think special levies go into consolidated revenue but I am sure you or someone else will argue this one with me.
I am rivetted to my seat in anticipation of being de-rided (pun intentded) again.

Jim Jones 4:33 pm 10 Sep 11

dungfungus said :

postalgeek wrote “Of course, if you can bring evidence (you know, a FACT) to the discussion that cyclists outstrip motorists as a drain on ‘the resources of the ACT’, I think we could have a very exciting exchange of valid and sensible points”
FACT: Cyclists pay no specific taxes for the infrastructure that allows them to commute all over Canberra (if they are fit enough and have time to spare). Not even the ambulance levy added to registration fees that all ACT motorists pay. Yet they appear to be users of ambulances more than motorists do.
The amount of ACT resources spent on pandering to the vocal, morally vain cyclists tearing around Canberra in their lycra pixie suits is totally unreasonable. Apart from the small personal proportion from their rates, the cyclists contribute nothing to the establishment of the “world class” facilities they use.

Over to you postalgeek.

Epic failure to understand how tax works.

Aeek 3:01 pm 10 Sep 11

FACT: Pedestrians pay no specific taxes for the infrastructure that allows them to commute all over Canberra.

And don’t get me started on free-loading Passengers.

Jethro 1:59 pm 10 Sep 11

breda said :

Jethro, the difference is that The Netherlands is as flat as a pancake. And it is a big difference for cyclists who are not young or uber fit.

Good swathes of Canberra are too.

And not all of the Netherlands is flat. The south-east is quite hilly and cycling is still a way of life for the good people of Limburg.

Postalgeek 1:00 pm 10 Sep 11

Ok, before we start, please read the definition below. Then review what you’ve written and provide something that isn’t, you know, the vibe of the thing.

fact |fakt|
noun

%u2022a thing that is indisputably the case.
%u2022 (usu. facts) a piece of information used as evidence or as part of a report or news article.
%u2022 chiefly (Law) the truth about events as opposed to interpretation.

So, for example, say you were to raise the issue of Ambulance Levies. You would go to the ACT Revenue Office site and read the following:
The Ambulance Levy is payable each month by private health insurance companies to offset the cost of providing ambulance services in the Territory. The levy is calculated on the number and type of private heath insurance contributions.
and then you might cite your source – http://www.revenue.act.gov.au/other_levies_and_taxes/ambulance_levy
And it would be reasonable for you to claim it was a FACT.

Something like:

Cyclists pay no specific taxes for the infrastructure that allows them to commute all over Canberra (if they are fit enough and have time to spare). Not even the ambulance levy added to registration fees that all ACT motorists pay. Yet they appear to be users of ambulances more than motorists do.

is not a FACT. It is unsupported and you could’ve sourced it from anywhere, such as your arse. Saying something ‘appears’ to be the case does not make it a fact. Give me some evidence and then you’ll be cooking.

For another example, had you looked up Consolidated Revenue Fund, you would understand that all monies paid to government go to, well, a consolidated revenue fund. The money you pay for registration does not go to roads. It goes to the CRF. It may then be used for health, or a public servant’s remuneration package. Or it might be spent on roads. Likewise, the ample land tax I pay may end up being used to fix a pothole (generally not created by cyclists).

I know it’s frustrating, but if you go off and do some research and cite some evidence you might actually sound informed.

Deckard 12:29 pm 10 Sep 11

dungfungus said :

FACT: Cyclists pay no specific taxes for the infrastructure that allows them to commute all over Canberra (if they are fit enough and have time to spare). Not even the ambulance levy added to registration fees that all ACT motorists pay. Yet they appear to be users of ambulances more than motorists do.
The amount of ACT resources spent on pandering to the vocal, morally vain cyclists tearing around Canberra in their lycra pixie suits is totally unreasonable. Apart from the small personal proportion from their rates, the cyclists contribute nothing to the establishment of the “world class” facilities they use.

Over to you postalgeek.

*sigh*

Jim Jones 11:45 am 10 Sep 11

00davist said :

I’m sorry mate, but for those of us who commute, costs are already high enough

Utter bollocks and statistically disproven very recently – it’s been all over the news. What is it that you fail to understand?

dungfungus 9:57 am 10 Sep 11

postalgeek wrote “Of course, if you can bring evidence (you know, a FACT) to the discussion that cyclists outstrip motorists as a drain on ‘the resources of the ACT’, I think we could have a very exciting exchange of valid and sensible points”
FACT: Cyclists pay no specific taxes for the infrastructure that allows them to commute all over Canberra (if they are fit enough and have time to spare). Not even the ambulance levy added to registration fees that all ACT motorists pay. Yet they appear to be users of ambulances more than motorists do.
The amount of ACT resources spent on pandering to the vocal, morally vain cyclists tearing around Canberra in their lycra pixie suits is totally unreasonable. Apart from the small personal proportion from their rates, the cyclists contribute nothing to the establishment of the “world class” facilities they use.

Over to you postalgeek.

breda 11:38 pm 09 Sep 11

Jethro, the difference is that The Netherlands is as flat as a pancake. And it is a big difference for cyclists who are not young or uber fit.

Aeek 11:23 pm 09 Sep 11

dungfungus said :

thrill-seeking eco-nuts who are a danger to themselves and a cost to the resources of the ACT that have to pick up the pieces for them.

That’s like lumping hormone fuelled youth together with blind old bats.
I could be a thrill seeker.
If so, isn’t it better for everyone that I mostly ride my bicycle rather than drive my car?

The riding are offset by offset by the exercise benefits, so 😛

milkman 11:22 pm 09 Sep 11

Jim Jones said :

What cost of living pressures? The ABS stats show that we’re better off than we’ve ever been, that petrol eats up less of the family budget than it did 6 years ago, etc.

Henny penny bullsh1t as per usual from politicians of all stripes.

I saw an article earlier this week showing how the average family now spends more on entertainment than they did previously. Clearly there is room to move for many people.

Also, the best way to reduce the real cost of owning a car is to keep the same vehicle for longer.

Jethro 10:48 pm 09 Sep 11

The Antichrist said :

If pushbikes were actually a valid alternative mode of transport for all, we would see Mum doing the weekly shopping on her treadlie.

I would suggest that they are a valid alternative in some circumstances, but that our culture doesn’t make room for them. eg. most suburbs in Canberra have local shops that service the suburb. Similarly, our suburbs are criss-crossed by a network of bike paths.

Yet most of us will jump in the car and drive to the corner store for a bottle of milk or loaf of bread – the thought of jumping on our pushy just wouldn’t cross our minds.

Yet in the Netherlands, it is part of their culture to ride for close local trips. There is no real difference between a 50 year old Dutch woman cycling 2km to get a loaf of bread and a 50 year old Aussie woman doing the same, other than we just don’t do it.

Postalgeek 10:12 pm 09 Sep 11

The Antichrist said :

Postalgeek said :

dungfungus said :

In case someone says I have forgotten to mention bikes, well I haven’t but in reality, the only people who seriously consider bikes as an alternative to cars are a small group of thrill-seeking eco-nuts who are a danger to themselves and a cost to the resources of the ACT that have to pick up the pieces for them.

you forget to mention that you have no idea what you’re talking about. That’s what’s missing!

No – no its not missing at all. He makes a totally valid and sensible point, that only thrill-seeeking eco-nuts would fail to agree with.

If pushbikes were actually a valid alternative mode of transport for all, we would see Mum doing the weekly shopping on her treadlie.

Well, for a start, the ‘for all’ is your addition to the discussion. You can go off and have that little straw man argument all by yourself.

As for the blanket statement “the only people who seriously consider bikes as an alternative to cars are a small group of thrill-seeking eco-nuts”, well, I’m keen to step back and let you extrapolate on that theory. We’ll leave places like Asia out of it to keep things simple.

Of course, if you can bring evidence (you know, a FACT) to the discussion that cyclists outstrip motorists as a drain on ‘the resources of the ACT’, I think we could have a very exciting exchange of valid and sensible points.

The Antichrist 7:27 pm 09 Sep 11

Postalgeek said :

dungfungus said :

In case someone says I have forgotten to mention bikes, well I haven’t but in reality, the only people who seriously consider bikes as an alternative to cars are a small group of thrill-seeking eco-nuts who are a danger to themselves and a cost to the resources of the ACT that have to pick up the pieces for them.

you forget to mention that you have no idea what you’re talking about. That’s what’s missing!

No – no its not missing at all. He makes a totally valid and sensible point, that only thrill-seeeking eco-nuts would fail to agree with.

If pushbikes were actually a valid alternative mode of transport for all, we would see Mum doing the weekly shopping on her treadlie.

00davist 3:57 pm 09 Sep 11

Jim Jones said :

00davist said :

Jim Jones said :

“Things are so tight that I can barely manage to pay to drive my massive f%^ck-off 4WD drive to and from my high-paying job in the public service and my McMansion and still be able to afford a giant Plasma television and eat takeaway every second night.”

WOW, Somone more out of touch than the current Govt!!!

WOW. Someone who actually believes the bullsh1t “we’re all doing it so tough” rhetoric that’s been fed to them.

Your really not getting any of my point are you, Well fine, you dont get it, gret, but lets move on from your trolling, from here on in, dont bother addressing me, unless you actually have a clue what I’m getting at!

00davist said :

Rawhide Kid Part3 said :

Why cant we use a system like user pays. That is only pay the amount of rego and insurance for the kilometers you have driven. Not what you might drive on a yearly basis. You could be billed on a three or six monthly basis after use. A bit like how you pay your energy bills . You don’t pay say $400 for electricity before you use it do you? The argument that every one has to pay x amount of dollars for using our roads whether they drive 40.000km or 100km per year is a crock. Just like the buses, the more you use them the more you pay as with the longer the distance on buses (even Trains) you travel the more you pay. Doesn’t that make sense than the rego system we have now?

And yes i know there would be a problem with insurance with this idea. But there are always ways around that.

I’m sorry mate, but for those of us who commute, costs are already high enough, and while you might be speaking more of deductions for those who drive less, your idea, once in the hands of a govt. would simply see costs going up for those who rely more heavily on there cars, and have less access to public transport.

To everyone else, here is where I was up to before the trolls set in!

James_ 2:39 pm 09 Sep 11

Takes me 25-30 to get to Woden by car from Belconnen

Takes me 15-20 on Motorbike as parking is easier at my place of employment – WAY easier.

Would take me the best part of 2-3 hours if i did it by bus. Simply not an option.
And yes i did look into it in depth. Including just getting to city terminals and walking to work from there. it is the lack of syncronisation between satelite suburbs and the intercity so called xpress busses.

An additive is that the nature of my work does not allow me to leave like other public servants to accomodate the busses schedule. Public transport is just not an option for me at all.
and that is a hugh shame and down point to living here in Canberra.

Jim Jones 2:23 pm 09 Sep 11

00davist said :

Jim Jones said :

“Things are so tight that I can barely manage to pay to drive my massive f%^ck-off 4WD drive to and from my high-paying job in the public service and my McMansion and still be able to afford a giant Plasma television and eat takeaway every second night.”

WOW, Somone more out of touch than the current Govt!!!

WOW. Someone who actually believes the bullsh1t “we’re all doing it so tough” rhetoric that’s been fed to them.

00davist 1:58 pm 09 Sep 11

Jim Jones said :

“Things are so tight that I can barely manage to pay to drive my massive f%^ck-off 4WD drive to and from my high-paying job in the public service and my McMansion and still be able to afford a giant Plasma television and eat takeaway every second night.”

WOW, Somone more out of touch than the current Govt!!!

00davist 1:55 pm 09 Sep 11

Jim Jones said :

00davist said :

I’m sorry mate, but for those of us who commute, costs are already high enough, and while you might be speaking more of deductions for those who drive less, your idea, once in the hands of a govt. would simply see costs going up for those who rely more heavily on there cars, and have less access to public transport.

Utter bollocks. Have a look at the ABS stats on cost of living – we’re not doing it tough at all. Australia has become a nation of self-obsessed over-consuming whingers with a sense of entitlement: ‘poor-me-I’m-doing-it-so-tough’ .

Well, You missed the point of that!

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2019 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site