Stop avoiding it, you need to get a submission in to Canberra 2030

I agree with above comments, they just seem to be focusing on getting more money in from residents, whilst being green, which seems a very narrow view to me. Canberra is a unique city, which the ACT gov seems to want to turn into a ubiquitous city which could be found anywhere in the world! (the survey had added none of the above to some questions)

Why not take advantage of the the existing community hubs in each suburb to provide services which would minimise the need for commutes. E.g have internet “hot seat” offices available in each suburb or Town centre so people can walk to work. Employers or employees could pay for this. It could even be outsourced to serviced office providers. A cafe or office in each suburb where locals can visit the online dr or access local gov services, this could be funded through savings from not having to encourage Drs to be in the ACT etc. Local tip drop offs, with one truck from the tip coming round weekly, rather than each resident making a trip to the tip.

I think we need to think outside the norms, whilst still meeting needs. Ok the above ideas need work, (am waiting to be hammered), just emphasising different thinking could be helpful.

Don’t complain about Canberra if you don’t contribute to making it better.

Consultation processes are always flawed, by their nature not all voices can be heard, not all concerns can be addressed.

But if you don’t go along, in my mind you have no right to winge.

30january1649 said :

the key question missing is ‘would you prefer to ensure Canberra’s population does not grow older by shagging, immigration or a happy mixture of both?’

Shagging immigrants?

the key question missing is ‘would you prefer to ensure Canberra’s population does not grow older by shagging, immigration or a happy mixture of both?’

p1 said :

The ageing population is a problem, with the ratio of productive members of society / members needing care changes. That is why I recommend a government campaign to encourage people to retire to Queensland. It will save on aged care, healthcare, free up much needed accomadtion…

I strongly suspect our federal overlords will increase the age of age pension eligibility, as well as the age at which superannuation can be accessed, as part of the solution to this problem.

I went to the consultation sessions, and i did the survey.

It is clear the survey is leading you to make decisions with a very very limited set of ‘acceptable’ responses. You cannot choose not to answer a question – the software simply insists you enter a response before you can proceed to the next question. There are no ‘none of the above’ options on any questions. I recall question 5 particularly stuck in my craw, and i didn’t like either option – but i had to choose one or the survey wouldn’t proceed.

No doubt Elton consulting can report back that x percentage of people want higher rates to pay for solar composting or some other unreasonable conclusion which will be drawn from a deeply flawed survey.

I raised this flawed survey at one of the consultation sessions last Thursday night, I was pretty much brushed off.

The age profile of people involved in the consultation sessions is something I only thought about when it was raised in the media. Certainly its something which concerns me, i note there was a young woman from pedal power and two or three other people below 30, but really, thats not a high percentage.

The facilitation has been OK, but its been done on the cheap. The facilitators at tables are act public servants who have volunteered their time, and their inexperience shows. The events are run by Elton consulting, and have run quite smoothly, although perhaps a bit too much ‘guidance’ than I would like.

This process is being run from the Chief Ministers Department, so it will be interesting to see what comes of it. i can already tell from the memes being floated via the survey and material at the consultation sessions, that we are being set up for higher rates and taxes under the guise of ‘sustainability’ whatever that means. Increased urban density and the urban form is also something which is being ‘guided’ via this process.

I dont have a problem with increased density, but their needs to be a clear policy in place so that if i buy a house in ruddtown it wont be surrounded by 4 storey blocks of units in 10 years. People need a clear choice in what type of dwelling they wish to live in, and also that they wont be subjected unfairly to developers changing their streetscape around them and not having any say in the process. I think that is the real issue that people are concerned with, they are not opposed to increased density – as they can see the benefits, but as in all things – there is a time and place.

As a public transport lobbyist, i was glad to see that i was not robinson carusoe at these sessions. poor public transport delivery from the bus system and and a need to change to a better system It was raised by many of the participants.

I would encourage people to make submissions. It takes very little time, and you are more likely to have input into public policy formation via a submission than venting on riotact or in a letter to the ct.

Woody Mann-Caruso said :

No assumption that if they run things a little better (or even exactly the same) then things don’t have to get worse?

Maybe because that assumption is bullsh*t. ( Population growth + population ageing + inflation ) – ( your wildest efficiency dividend fantasy ) > 0. Much, much greater.
.

So how did we get to have a city this size, with the resources we have now? Population growth of course means that infrastructure needs to increase In order to support it…. Such as has been hAppening for the last (almost) hundred years.

The ageing population is a problem, with the ratio of productive members of society / members needing care changes. That is why I recommend a government campaign to encourage people to retire to Queensland. It will save on aged care, healthcare, free up much needed accomadtion…

I’d like No Waste by 2010… oh.. wait…

but seriously, I’ll fill in the survey but its a shame that the responses seem skewed…

No assumption that if they run things a little better (or even exactly the same) then things don’t have to get worse?

Maybe because that assumption is bullsh*t. ( Population growth + population ageing + inflation ) – ( your wildest efficiency dividend fantasy ) > 0. Much, much greater.

Same as the tools in the MDB. “Ooh, don’t make us pay more for water or reduce our quotas – we’ll just promise to be more efficient!” Well, you had your chance to do it on your own, and you failed. So have a guess what the best incentive for you to be more efficient might be from now on? That’s right, Einsteins – jacking up the price and cutting off supply.

I went to one of the info sessions and the table next to mine was full of developers. Citizens should get in there and agitate. JB you’ll be getting close to your own dotage in 2030 won’t you? Trundle-friendly sounds fine to me!